| From: | Arthur Zakirov <a(dot)zakirov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | exclusion(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: BUG #15150: Reading uninitialised value in NISortAffixes (tsearch/spell.c) |
| Date: | 2018-04-13 11:34:48 |
| Message-ID: | 20180413113447.GA32474@zakirov.localdomain |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 06:14:03PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Yeah, existing code is clearly wrong, patch looks OK, will push.
Thank you for the commit!
> But I see from the code coverage report that this bit is unexercised
> in the regression tests. Any chance of getting a test that covers
> this? I'm worried that this means we also lack any coverage of
> cases where the CompoundAffix array has more than one entry.
I attached the patch. It fixes the following:
- show an error if actual number of affix aliases is greater than
initial number. I wonder is it necessary. But I think it is better to
raise an error than crash, if you set wrong number for AF flag.
- improve code coverage for NISortAffixes().
- test regex_t expressions.
- test MergeAffix()
- test mkVoidAffix() better
The code coverage still isn't 100% for spell.c. But it is better than
earlier.
--
Arthur Zakirov
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
Russian Postgres Company
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| improve-spell-codecoverage.patch | text/plain | 5.9 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2018-04-13 17:51:00 | Re: BUG #15150: Reading uninitialised value in NISortAffixes (tsearch/spell.c) |
| Previous Message | PG Bug reporting form | 2018-04-13 11:06:45 | BUG #15154: hstore_to_jsonb_loose erroneously casting scientific notation number strings |