From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>
cc: Chao Li <li.evan.chao@gmail.com>,
        PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Add bms_offset_members() function for bitshifting Bitmapsets
In-reply-to: 
 <CAApHDvoALVPgVSCuGdAfNUbxx_NacnAd0nuj8Hi=_-61AEqzaQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAApHDvq=eEdw2Qp+aSzSOtTSe+h0fnVQ55CcTNqBkLDYiRZmxw@mail.gmail.com>
 <278B9FE3-F349-4494-99C5-483105C1C999@gmail.com>
 <CAApHDvoALVPgVSCuGdAfNUbxx_NacnAd0nuj8Hi=_-61AEqzaQ@mail.gmail.com>
Comments: In-reply-to David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>
	message dated "Wed, 15 Apr 2026 11:45:12 +1200"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <1900288.1776212948.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2026 20:29:08 -0400
Message-ID: <1900289.1776212948@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/1900289.1776212948%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com> writes:
> Your idea of checking the old highest member plus the offset seems a
> more robust method, so I've adjusted the patch to use that.

I question the decision to make this change the set in-place.
Wouldn't it be cheaper and less surprise-prone to always make
a copy?

			regards, tom lane