From: | Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com |
Cc: | michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz, andres(at)anarazel(dot)de, nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: fix stats_fetch_consistency value in postgresql.conf.sample |
Date: | 2022-06-17 00:43:58 |
Message-ID: | 20220617.094358.2201653243066915172.horikyota.ntt@gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
At Thu, 16 Jun 2022 08:23:07 -0500, Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com> wrote in
> On Thu, Jun 16, 2022 at 05:19:46PM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> > At Sat, 11 Jun 2022 09:41:37 -0500, Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com> wrote in
> > > Note that this gives:
> > >
> > > guc.c:7573:9: warning: ‘dst’ may be used uninitialized in this function [-Wmaybe-uninitialized]
> >
> > Mmm. I don't have an idea where the 'dst' came from...
>
> Well, in your latest patch, you've renamed it.
>
> guc.c:7586:19: warning: ‘result’ may be used uninitialized in this function [-Wmaybe-uninitialized]
> 7586 | PG_RETURN_TEXT_P(cstring_to_text(result));
Ooo. I find that the patch on my hand was different from that on this
list by some reason uncertain to me. I now understand what's
happening.
At Sat, 11 Jun 2022 09:41:37 -0500, Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com> wrote in
> with gcc version 9.2.1 20191008 (Ubuntu 9.2.1-9ubuntu2)
My compiler (gcc 8.5.0) (with -Wswitch) is satisfied by finding that
the switch() covers all enum values. I don't know why the new
compiler complains with this, but compilers in such environment should
shut up by the following change.
- char *result;
+ char *result = "";
regards.
--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
v3-0001-Add-fileval-bootval-consistency-check-of-GUC-para.patch | text/x-patch | 7.2 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Justin Pryzby | 2022-06-17 02:01:03 | Re: pg_upgrade (12->14) fails on aggregate |
Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2022-06-17 00:16:41 | Re: PG 15 (and to a smaller degree 14) regression due to ExprEvalStep size |