Re: The return value of allocate_recordbuf()

From: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: The return value of allocate_recordbuf()
Date: 2015-04-03 12:57:29
Message-ID: CAHGQGwGMKAYAuj7h1ftBrbk+AWdb8C2-4P5KwrZ3bWzL2x54Aw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 8:37 PM, Michael Paquier
<michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 6:35 PM, Fujii Masao wrote:
>> Regarding the second patch, you added the checks of the return value of
>> XLogReaderAllocate(). But it seems half-baked. XLogReaderAllocate() still
>> uses palloc(), but don't we need to replace it with palloc_extended(), too?
>
> Doh, you are right. I missed three places. Attached is a new patch
> completing the fix.

Thanks for the patch! I updated two source code comments and
changed the log message when XLogReaderAllocate returns NULL
within XLOG_DEBUG block. Just pushed.

Regards,

--
Fujii Masao

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Steele 2015-04-03 13:01:43 Re: Auditing extension for PostgreSQL (Take 2)
Previous Message Robert Haas 2015-04-03 12:49:37 Re: Abbreviated keys for text cost model fix