From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
cc: Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Indirect indexes
In-reply-to: <20161229072807.b2p4ld55xmgwshhj@alvherre.pgsql>
References: <20161229072807.b2p4ld55xmgwshhj@alvherre.pgsql>
Comments: In-reply-to Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
	message dated "Thu, 29 Dec 2016 04:28:07 -0300"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <18671.1483022414.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2016 09:40:14 -0500
Message-ID: <18672.1483022414@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> One exception: in htup_details.h I changed the definition of
> HeapTupleHeaderIsHeapOnly() so that it returns a true boolean rather
> than a random bit in a wider integer.  Without this change, my compiler
> complains when the result is passed as a bool argument into a function.

That should probably get committed as a separate bug fix, and
back-patched.  Since HEAP_ONLY_TUPLE is 0x8000, the result of the existing
macro would actually fail to fit into a bool variable, meaning we have a
real coding hazard here.  It would be nasty if code developed in HEAD
failed when back-patched because of that.

Andres ran around and fixed a bunch of these hazards before, but
evidently missed this one.

			regards, tom lane


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers