Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([2a02:16a8:dc51::56])
	by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps
 (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256)
	(Exim 4.89)
	(envelope-from <pgsql-hackers-owner+archive@lists.postgresql.org>)
	id 1ffakM-0005aG-Kn
	for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 00:55:14 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org)
	by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89)
	(envelope-from <pgsql-hackers-owner+archive@lists.postgresql.org>)
	id 1ffakK-00077h-VD
	for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 00:55:12 +0000
Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:1501:1::229])
	by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256)
	(Exim 4.89)
	(envelope-from <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
	id 1ffakK-00077I-L5
	for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 00:55:12 +0000
Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130])
	by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256)
	(Exim 4.89)
	(envelope-from <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
	id 1ffakI-0005jL-E5
	for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 00:55:11 +0000
Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id w6I0t5UE018007;
	Tue, 17 Jul 2018 20:55:06 -0400
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
cc: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>,
        Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>,
        PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: ENOSPC FailedAssertion("!(RefCountErrors == 0)"
In-reply-to: 
 <CA+TgmoY_aunsjo+jOEDc-p53Qvh7xxocccMiy8sy60ppPiyfXQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20180627233939.GA10276@telsasoft.com>
 <20180628020432.GB11054@paquier.xyz> <7317.1531694923@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <20180716131337.usestwjviwwocpyz@alap3.anarazel.de>
 <20436.1531751966@sss.pgh.pa.us> <4993.1531773411@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <14892.1531872065@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <CA+TgmoY_aunsjo+jOEDc-p53Qvh7xxocccMiy8sy60ppPiyfXQ@mail.gmail.com>
Comments: In-reply-to Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
	message dated "Tue, 17 Jul 2018 20:52:16 -0400"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <18005.1531875305.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2018 20:55:05 -0400
Message-ID: <18006.1531875305@sss.pgh.pa.us>
List-Id: <pgsql-hackers.lists.postgresql.org>
List-Help: <https://lists.postgresql.org/manage/>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.postgresql.org/manage/>
List-Post: <mailto:pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
List-Owner: <mailto:pgsql-hackers-owner@lists.postgresql.org>
List-Archive: <https://www.postgresql.org/list/pgsql-hackers>
Precedence: bulk

Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 8:01 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> Any objections?  Anyone want to do further review?

> LGTM.  I think this is an improvement.  However, it seems like it
> might be a good idea for ResourceOwnerRememberBuffer and
> ResourceOwnerForgetBuffer to Assert(buffer != NULL), so that if
> somebody messes up it will trip an assertion rather than just seg
> faulting.

Uh, what?  There are only a few callers of those, and they'd all have
crashed already if they were somehow dealing with an invalid buffer.

			regards, tom lane