Re: pgsql: Fix potential stack overflow in incremental backup.

From: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
Cc: Thomas Munro <tmunro(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-committers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pgsql: Fix potential stack overflow in incremental backup.
Date: 2024-04-11 02:39:02
Message-ID: CA+hUKG+ge+bZjvJmVYkepCEO-bBeZTe7HmoWpByD2oY-3hL6nw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-committers

On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 2:28 PM Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
> + * file just as if this were not an incremental backup. The contents of the
> + * relative_block_numbers array is unspecified in this case.
>
> Perhaps you mean s/is/are/ here? The contents are what's not
> specified.

Thanks, fixed. Duh.

In response to

Browse pgsql-committers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bharath Rupireddy 2024-04-11 07:08:06 Re: pgsql: Fix race leading to incorrect conflict cause in InvalidatePossib
Previous Message Thomas Munro 2024-04-11 02:38:28 pgsql: Fix grammar.