On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 6:15 AM, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> wrote:
> Another option to use "unsigned int", on the assumption that UINT_MAX >=
> INT_MAX * 2 + 1. And to eliminate that assumption, we can use (UINT_MAX - 1)
> / 2 as the maximum size of the memtuples array, rather than INT_MAX.
FWIW, memtupcount is allowed to go negative. It just won't in this
function, per the assertion. So the fix should be specifically scoped
to only the one function that is affected. That's a good idea anyway,
of course.
--
Peter Geoghegan