Re: pg_malloc0() instead of pg_malloc()+memset()

From: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
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 09:14:46
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tuesday, March 26, 2019 9:00 AM, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:

> 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.

Nice, I had missed them as I my eyes set on pg_malloc(). I've done another pass over
the codebase and I can't spot any other on top of the additional ones you found where
MemSet() in palloc0 is preferrable over memset().

cheers ./daniel

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Pavan Deolasee 2019-03-26 09:26:31 Re: COPY FREEZE and setting PD_ALL_VISIBLE/visibility map bits
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2019-03-26 09:12:05 Re: Offline enabling/disabling of data checksums