Re: Possible integer overflow in bringetbitmap()

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: James Hunter <james(dot)hunter(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Evgeniy Gorbanyov <gorbanyoves(at)basealt(dot)ru>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Possible integer overflow in bringetbitmap()
Date: 2024-12-20 23:22:22
Message-ID: Z2X8LoOfyfZbcbfa@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Dec 10, 2024 at 12:33:08PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Sure, you could do (a) and (b) together. It also seems to me that it
> is just simpler to make totalpages a int64 to map automatically with
> the result expected by the caller of bringetbitmap(), and we know that
> based on MaxBlockNumber we'll never run out of bits.

That should be simple enough. Are you planning to send a proposal of
patch?
--
Michael

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Masahiko Sawada 2024-12-20 23:25:37 Re: Parallel heap vacuum
Previous Message Daniel Gustafsson 2024-12-20 22:47:02 Re: Discussion on a LISTEN-ALL syntax