Re: zeros in oidvector type

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: Re: zeros in oidvector type
Date: 2000-01-11 14:53:54
Message-ID: 4105.947602434@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> The reason I ask is that there are some parts of the code that try to
> find the number of args by looking for the _first_ non-zero entry in the
> list.

Where? This is certainly broken for anything that needs to deal with
an arbitrary pg_proc entry, but it might be OK in limited contexts.
Also, if you are thinking of stuff that looks at *index* definitions
rather than *function* definitions, I think it's OK.

> I changed those to look for the _last_ non-zero entry, but it
> sounds like that is still wrong.

I'm dubious about changing something like that without fairly close
investigation and/or a known bug to fix. If those bits of code are
wrong, they were wrong before the FUNC_MAX_ARGS change ... and if
they weren't wrong, maybe they are now.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2000-01-11 15:06:10 Re: [HACKERS] Who fried this?
Previous Message Paul M. Aoki 2000-01-11 14:26:10 Re: [HACKERS] Historical trivia (was Re: First Major Open Source Database)