From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>
cc: James Inform <james.inform@pharmapp.de>,
        PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org>,
        Euler Taveira <euler@eulerto.com>
Subject: Re: BUG #17584: SQL crashes PostgreSQL when using ICU collation
In-reply-to: 
 <CAH2-Wzk11wvwjhrbje4DDyXydy5pGACb4wNCHCXiuij0Y10h+Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <17584-95c79b4a7d771f44@postgresql.org>
 <f6d74de8-df28-4ef7-8d9e-10f2ab77ea8e@www.fastmail.com>
 <a9851f48-b281-8313-52f4-59ece14adb86@pharmapp.de>
 <465044.1660428315@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <92087cd5-5410-a4e9-41fe-4ff310439190@pharmapp.de>
 <541938.1660437017@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <CAH2-Wzk11wvwjhrbje4DDyXydy5pGACb4wNCHCXiuij0Y10h+Q@mail.gmail.com>
Comments: In-reply-to Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>
	message dated "Sat, 13 Aug 2022 19:43:30 -0700"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <555146.1660447264.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2022 23:21:04 -0400
Message-ID: <555147.1660447264@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/555147.1660447264%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie> writes:
> I think that repalloc might even be mandatory. These buffers are used
> as caches that allow us to avoid repeat strxfrm()/strcoll() calls,
> which is quite a useful optimization. But we're not accounting for
> that here -- we're not invalidating the cache. We wouldn't have to
> bother with that if we just used repalloc().

Hmm, but if we're enlarging the buffer, doesn't that imply
a new input value?  Seems like invalidation must occur anyway.

			regards, tom lane