Re: Using Valgrind to detect faulty buffer accesses (no pin or buffer content lock held)

From: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>
To: Georgios Kokolatos <gkokolatos(at)protonmail(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Using Valgrind to detect faulty buffer accesses (no pin or buffer content lock held)
Date: 2020-07-21 21:52:21
Message-ID: CAH2-WzmgC28b7qO4PsjB990xt3qg=RgtFXXFDavN7dHm3kMB_A@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Jul 6, 2020 at 1:35 AM Georgios Kokolatos
<gkokolatos(at)protonmail(dot)com> wrote:
> As a general overview, the series of patches in the mail thread do match their description. The addition of the stricter, explicit use of instrumentation does improve the design as the distinction of the use cases requiring a pin or a lock is made more clear. The added commentary is descriptive and appears grammatically correct, at least to a non native speaker.

I didn't see this review until now because it ended up in gmail's spam
folder. :-(

Thanks for taking a look at it!

--
Peter Geoghegan

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2020-07-21 22:18:26 Re: Infinities in type numeric
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2020-07-21 20:55:37 Re: Which SET TYPE don't actually require a rewrite