Re: Increase repalloc_array() usage in buffile.c

From: Sami Imseih <samimseih(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>
Cc: Tristan Partin <tristan(at)partin(dot)io>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Increase repalloc_array() usage in buffile.c
Date: 2026-07-29 20:21:28
Message-ID: CAA5RZ0sR1QrVYxXWzfBqwcUg7ose-EMHORXtWJPghGig+1aarw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> > I was reading some buffile.c code, and I noticed some hand-rolled
> > versions of repalloc_array() (minus the multiplication check). Since we
> > already have one usage of repalloc_array() in buffile.c for
> > BufFile::files, I figured it would probably be alright if we used it in
> > the other two locations as well.
>
> +1 for the concept, but I wonder why these weren't covered by 1b105f9472bdb?

hmm, right. specifically 1b105f9472bdb bulk updated buffile.c. Only explanation
I see is they were missed in a large update.

--
Sami

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Daniel Gustafsson 2026-07-29 20:31:34 Re: pg_restore --format= option(without any value) should report an error as pg_dump is reporting an error
Previous Message Daniel Gustafsson 2026-07-29 20:18:13 Re: Remove the refint contrib module (for v20)