public inbox for [email protected]  
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
[PATCH 02/18] Update comment obsolete since 69c3936a
2+ messages / 2 participants
[nested] [flat]

* [PATCH 02/18] Update comment obsolete since 69c3936a
@ 2020-02-15 21:53  Justin Pryzby <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread

From: Justin Pryzby @ 2020-02-15 21:53 UTC (permalink / raw)

---
 src/backend/executor/nodeAgg.c | 3 +--
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/src/backend/executor/nodeAgg.c b/src/backend/executor/nodeAgg.c
index 601b6dab03..394b4e667b 100644
--- a/src/backend/executor/nodeAgg.c
+++ b/src/backend/executor/nodeAgg.c
@@ -2064,8 +2064,7 @@ initialize_hash_entry(AggState *aggstate, TupleHashTable hashtable,
 }
 
 /*
- * Look up hash entries for the current tuple in all hashed grouping sets,
- * returning an array of pergroup pointers suitable for advance_aggregates.
+ * Look up hash entries for the current tuple in all hashed grouping sets.
  *
  * Be aware that lookup_hash_entry can reset the tmpcontext.
  *
-- 
2.17.0


--lc9FT7cWel8HagAv
Content-Type: text/x-diff; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: attachment;
 filename="0003-pg_restore-must-be-specified-and-list.patch"



^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 2+ messages in thread

* Re: glibc qsort() vulnerability
@ 2024-02-06 20:55  Tom Lane <[email protected]>
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread

From: Tom Lane @ 2024-02-06 20:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Nathan Bossart <[email protected]>; +Cc: Mats Kindahl <[email protected]>; [email protected]

Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> writes:
> Even if the glibc issue doesn't apply to Postgres, I'm tempted to suggest
> that we make it project policy that comparison functions must be
> transitive.  There might be no real issues today, but if we write all
> comparison functions the way Mats is suggesting, it should be easier to
> reason about overflow risks.

A comparison routine that is not is probably broken, agreed.
I didn't look through the details of the patch --- I was more
curious whether we had a version of the qsort bug, because
if we do, we should fix that too.

			regards, tom lane






^ permalink  raw  reply  [nested|flat] 2+ messages in thread


end of thread, other threads:[~2024-02-06 20:55 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox mbox.gz follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2020-02-15 21:53 [PATCH 02/18] Update comment obsolete since 69c3936a Justin Pryzby <[email protected]>
2024-02-06 20:55 Re: glibc qsort() vulnerability Tom Lane <[email protected]>

This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox