Hi, On 2022-04-03 17:46:28 +1200, Thomas Munro wrote: > On Sun, Apr 3, 2022 at 11:11 AM Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote: > > On 2022-04-03 09:45:13 +1200, Thomas Munro wrote: > > > I think we just need to decide up front if we're in a situation that > > > can't provide datum1/isnull1 (in this case because it's an expression > > > index), and skip the optimised paths. Here's an experimental patch... > > > still looking into whether there are more cases like this... > > I didn't find anything else. > > Maybe it'd be better if we explicitly declared whether datum1 is used > in each tuplesort mode's 'begin' function, right next to the code that > installs the set of routines that are in control of that? Trying that > in this version. Is it clearer what's going on like this?
Seems an improvement. > > I'm a bit worried that none of the !ubsan tests failed on this... > > In accordance with whoever-it-was-that-said-that's law about things > that aren't tested, this are turned out to be broken already[1]. Yea :/. Would be good to get this committed soon, so we can see further ubsan violations introduced in the next few days (and so I can unblock my local dev tests :P). Greetings, Andres Freund
