| From: | Henson Choi <assam258(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Cc: | jacob(dot)champion(at)enterprisedb(dot)com, david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com, vik(at)postgresfriends(dot)org, er(at)xs4all(dot)nl, peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Row pattern recognition |
| Date: | 2026-01-20 02:29:34 |
| Message-ID: | CAAAe_zC9pSE5m9ZhqpQ3BDbro30MZVpjvZkJy80Rr=J=5C1Zeg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi Ishii-san,
While reviewing the code, I noticed a potential improvement
in 'register_reduced_frame_map()':
diff --git a/src/backend/executor/nodeWindowAgg.c
b/src/backend/executor/nodeWindowAgg.c
index 5185ad40237..3a71c279945 100644
--- a/src/backend/executor/nodeWindowAgg.c
+++ b/src/backend/executor/nodeWindowAgg.c
@@ -4770,7 +4770,7 @@ register_reduced_frame_map(WindowAggState *winstate,
int64 pos, int val)
if (pos < 0)
elog(ERROR, "wrong pos: " INT64_FORMAT, pos);
- if (pos > winstate->alloc_sz - 1)
+ while (pos > winstate->alloc_sz - 1)
{
realloc_sz = winstate->alloc_sz * 2;
In practice, 'pos' is always sequential (0, 1, 2, ...),
so the current 'if' works fine - doubling once is always
sufficient for +1 increment.
However, using 'while' would be more defensive, handling
any theoretical case where 'pos' might jump by more than
2x the current size.
It's a trivial change with no functional impact on normal
operation, but makes the code more robust.
What do you think?
Best regards
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Rob Moore | 2026-01-20 02:33:23 | Proposal: Add backup start time to pg_stat_progress_basebackup |
| Previous Message | David Rowley | 2026-01-20 02:20:13 | Re: Patch: dumping tables data in multiple chunks in pg_dump |