From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: Dmitry Mityugov <d.mityugov@postgrespro.ru>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: patch: Use pg_assume in jsonb_util.c to fix GCC 15 warnings
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2025 19:52:05 -0400
Message-ID: <1144304.1752623525@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAH2-Wzk-LH8Ln235hB4Y39EDFE6Bvb2bxKxMn_Ru4GjJNxTHnA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <0c623e8a204187b87b4736792398eaf1@postgrespro.ru>
<82868.1752342174@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<ib5yhkzseb27icjpz5p6wqgppaoa2nhjzj3ldx23d65ehciwin@um6dx2bpxux3>
<CAH2-WzkXwnY=cNGDODOyW=AhT4H8Rj7MiOk3mcN=Ua2w8C=RZg@mail.gmail.com>
<1138043.1752620290@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<CAH2-WzmS84KwUuZaP-ha7YwCCatDbQHcEjUGLDuihC5B=kxc1A@mail.gmail.com>
<1141814.1752622038@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<CAH2-Wzk-LH8Ln235hB4Y39EDFE6Bvb2bxKxMn_Ru4GjJNxTHnA@mail.gmail.com>
Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie> writes:
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2025 at 7:27 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> I'd be a bit worried about
>> creating a back-patching mine-field. But maybe these are all
>> in spots we're unlikely to touch?
> That seems like much less of a problem for a purely subtractive change
> such as this.
Not really convinced. Taking a sample at random (from ExecRenameStmt
in alter.c):
return address;
}
default:
elog(ERROR, "unrecognized rename stmt type: %d",
(int) stmt->renameType);
return InvalidObjectAddress; /* keep compiler happy */
}
}
Assume we remove the "return InvalidObjectAddress;" line and later
need to back-patch a change touching this area.
If we were to add/change something in front of the "default:", we're
probably fine because the "default:" and the elog() would be enough
context lines to allow patch(1) to figure out where to put the
addition/change. However, if we wanted to add something after the
switch construct, we'd get an apply failure and have to fix it
manually --- or worse, patch(1) would apply the delta in the
wrong place.
I'm not sure how likely such scenarios are, but it doesn't seem
zero-risk. And if we do hundreds of these, the odds of trouble
will increase.
regards, tom lane
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, pg@bowt.ie, andres@anarazel.de, d.mityugov@postgrespro.ru
Subject: Re: patch: Use pg_assume in jsonb_util.c to fix GCC 15 warnings
In-Reply-To: <1144304.1752623525@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox