| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_malloc0() instead of pg_malloc()+memset() |
| Date: | 2019-03-26 08:00:12 |
| Message-ID: | 20190326080012.GT2558@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 01:18:05PM +0000, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> When reading another codepath, I happened to notice a few codepaths where we do
> pg_malloc() immediately followed by a memset( .. 0, ..), without there being a
> justification (that I can see) for not using pg_malloc0() instead. The attached
> patch changes to pg_malloc0(), and passes make check.
If we simplify all of them (and that's not really a big deal), I have
spotted two extra places on top of what you noticed, one in gist.c
where ROTATEDIST is defined and a second one in tablefunc.c.
Thoughts?
--
Michael
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| alloc-memset-v2.patch | text/x-diff | 3.0 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2019-03-26 08:19:32 | Re: [Patch] pg_rewind: options to use restore_command from recovery.conf or command line |
| Previous Message | Konstantin Knizhnik | 2019-03-26 07:58:56 | Re: libpq compression |