From: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Ranier Vilela <ranier(dot)vf(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Uninitialized scalar variable (UNINIT) (src/backend/statistics/extended_stats.c) |
Date: | 2021-04-13 22:55:55 |
Message-ID: | 44db464c-b9e2-9d37-5c29-6f784a3fe7bd@enterprisedb.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 4/12/21 7:04 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Ranier Vilela <ranier(dot)vf(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> Em seg., 12 de abr. de 2021 às 03:04, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> escreveu:
>>> It would be wrong, though, or at least not have the same effect.
>
>> I think that you speak about fill pointers with 0 is not the same as fill
>> pointers with NULL.
>
> No, I mean that InvalidBlockNumber isn't 0.
>
>> I was confused here, does the patch follow the pattern and fix the problem
>> or not?
>
> Your patch seems fine. Justin's proposed improvement isn't.
>
Pushed.
> (I'm not real sure whether there's any *actual* bug here --- would we
> really be looking at either ctid or tableoid of this temporary tuple?
> But it's probably best to ensure that they're valid anyway.)>
Yeah, the tuple is only built so that we can pass it to the various
selectivity estimators. I don't think anything will be actually looking
at those fields, but initializing them seems easy enough.
regards
--
Tomas Vondra
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Masahiko Sawada | 2021-04-14 00:06:07 | Re: New IndexAM API controlling index vacuum strategies |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2021-04-13 22:26:34 | Converting contrib SQL functions to new style |