From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Arthur Zakirov <a.zakirov@postgrespro.ru>
cc: exclusion@gmail.com, pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: BUG #15150: Reading uninitialised value in NISortAffixes
 (tsearch/spell.c)
In-reply-to: <20180413113447.GA32474@zakirov.localdomain>
References: <152353327780.31225.13445405496721177988@wrigleys.postgresql.org>
 <20180412115638.GA19444@zakirov.localdomain> <23884.1523571243@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <20180413113447.GA32474@zakirov.localdomain>
Comments: In-reply-to Arthur Zakirov <a.zakirov@postgrespro.ru>
	message dated "Fri, 13 Apr 2018 14:34:48 +0300"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <16384.1523641860.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2018 13:51:00 -0400
Message-ID: <16385.1523641860@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Arthur Zakirov <a.zakirov@postgrespro.ru> writes:
> On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 06:14:03PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> But I see from the code coverage report that this bit is unexercised
>> in the regression tests.  Any chance of getting a test that covers
>> this?  I'm worried that this means we also lack any coverage of
>> cases where the CompoundAffix array has more than one entry.

> I attached the patch. It fixes the following:
> - show an error if actual number of affix aliases is greater than
>   initial number. I wonder is it necessary. But I think it is better to
>   raise an error than crash, if you set wrong number for AF flag.

Good idea, but I tweaked the message wording a bit.

> The code coverage still isn't 100% for spell.c. But it is better than
> earlier.

Indeed.  Pushed, thanks!

			regards, tom lane