| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jacob Champion <jacob(dot)champion(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, pgsql-committers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: pgsql: Fix up misuse of "volatile" in contrib/xml2. |
| Date: | 2025-07-10 17:27:59 |
| Message-ID: | 1604720.1752168479@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-committers |
Jacob Champion <jacob(dot)champion(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> On Wed, Jul 9, 2025 at 8:55 PM Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 09, 2025 at 11:49:55AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Not sure. Yesterday I saw such warnings from arowana,
>>> boa, dhole, rhinoceros, and shelduck, eg
>> They are all using some gcc 4.X flavor, most with -O2 but not all.
> I think I remember that GCC has had historical problems with tuning
> the false-positive:false-negative rates for `-Wmaybe-uninitialized`.
> It's not super surprising to me that later versions aren't always
> better at seeing specific problems, especially if users were
> complaining that an earlier version was too sensitive...
Yeah. Worth noting also is that even the machines that were
complaining were warning about just a subset of the xpath.c functions
that had this problem :-(. So there's definitely some heuristics
involved, which seems odd for what feels like it ought to be a
pretty black-and-white condition.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Nathan Bossart | 2025-07-10 20:54:13 | pgsql: pg_dump: Fix object-type sort priority for large objects. |
| Previous Message | Jacob Champion | 2025-07-10 17:21:51 | Re: pgsql: Fix up misuse of "volatile" in contrib/xml2. |