Re: scalability bottlenecks with (many) partitions (and more)

On 9/23/24 01:06, Tom Lane wrote:
> Tomas Vondra <tomas(at)vondra(dot)me> writes:
>> On 9/22/24 17:45, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> #define FAST_PATH_GROUP(index) \
>>> - (AssertMacro(((index) >= 0) && ((index) < FP_LOCK_SLOTS_PER_BACKEND)), \
>>> + (AssertMacro((uint32) (index) < FP_LOCK_SLOTS_PER_BACKEND), \
>>> ((index) / FP_LOCK_SLOTS_PER_GROUP))
>
>> For the (x >= 0) asserts, doing it this way relies on negative values
>> wrapping to large positive ones, correct? AFAIK it's guaranteed to be a
>> very large value, so it can't accidentally be less than the slot count.
>
> Right, any negative value would wrap to something more than
> INT32_MAX.
>

Thanks. Pushed a fix for these issues, hopefully coverity will be happy.

BTW is the coverity report accessible somewhere? I know someone
mentioned that in the past, but I don't recall the details. Maybe we
should have a list of all these resources, useful for committers,
somewhere on the wiki?

regards

--
Tomas Vondra