| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Beena Emerson <memissemerson(at)gmail(dot)com>, Rafia Sabih <rafia(dot)sabih(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jeevan Ladhe <jeevan(dot)ladhe(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Default Partition for Range |
| Date: | 2017-06-21 14:38:00 |
| Message-ID: | CA+Tgmoa7EMBgWWyJVN1KRZJdeq2zJVd6+X_yRJn9MMLUQGV+rQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 8:57 AM, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> For the default partition we are only setting bound->content[0] to
> default, but content for others key
> attributes are not initialized. But later in the code, if the content
> of the first key is RANGE_DATUM_DEFAULT then it should not access the
> next content, but I see there are some exceptions. Which can access
> uninitialized value?
I think somebody should do some testing of the existing code with
valgrind. And then apply the list-partitioning patch and this patch,
and do some more testing with valgrind. It seems to be really easy to
miss these uninitialized access problems during code review.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Daniel Gustafsson | 2017-06-21 14:42:47 | Re: Optional message to user when terminating/cancelling backend |
| Previous Message | Alex K | 2017-06-21 14:37:44 | Re: GSOC'17 project introduction: Parallel COPY execution with errors handling |