From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>
cc: Alexander Lakhin <exclusion@gmail.com>,
        Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: BUG #17855: Uninitialised memory used when the name type value
 processed in binary mode of Memoize
In-reply-to: 
 <CAApHDvrG=X6YK3WajkvybT5k=nnWt3W+yr8tMcFHYVVjej8zKw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <17855-5f523e0f9769a566@postgresql.org>
 <CAApHDvqwwdO1EAo-6osu-LtTk1SD2iQjLQXhVd7Wamc-JfhfrQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAApHDvokmLEriy3+4vB0KjCQip5pMq0g_JJX-wHNDvBJKukr6w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAApHDvqNo_7yipfLjVXatUUosEkKZrdhHxAObPuxSat8UQaUTw@mail.gmail.com>
 <b2a382d6-d261-fdb6-176c-d0cdbf63dce8@gmail.com>
 <CAApHDvqqvkorexCuVkSJ16LcqGKfUdLAn3Y+YsqKNT3Pe56oOA@mail.gmail.com>
 <3943232.1714060238@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <CAApHDvpW3ZEyTyogjD6qJsnuTFujLk3yTyCPX-to7VhftkrakQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <c898e301-ea62-e551-bfbc-2b7579150c14@gmail.com>
 <1228403.1714400922@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <CAApHDvrG=X6YK3WajkvybT5k=nnWt3W+yr8tMcFHYVVjej8zKw@mail.gmail.com>
Comments: In-reply-to David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>
	message dated "Tue, 30 Apr 2024 12:48:30 +1200"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <1670903.1714488843.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2024 10:54:03 -0400
Message-ID: <1670904.1714488843@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/1670904.1714488843%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com> writes:
> I think this is a good idea.  It seems reasonable that some other AM
> might want to do the same thing. Also, it allows me to choose a better
> name for these new IndexOnlyScanState fields. ioss_NameCStringAttNums
> and ioss_NameCStringCount seems more on point. However, I couldn't
> really decide which way around to have Name and CString.

This version LGTM.  The field names are fine, or at least I don't see
a reason to prefer the other way.  One trivial nit: should we make
the array be AttrNumber* instead of int*?  The space saving would be
negligible (it being very unlikely that there's ever more than one
entry), but AttrNumber is a more specific description of what it is.

			regards, tom lane