Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes:
> On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 8:01 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> Any objections? Anyone want to do further review?
> LGTM. I think this is an improvement. However, it seems like it
> might be a good idea for ResourceOwnerRememberBuffer and
> ResourceOwnerForgetBuffer to Assert(buffer != NULL), so that if
> somebody messes up it will trip an assertion rather than just seg
> faulting.
Uh, what? There are only a few callers of those, and they'd all have
crashed already if they were somehow dealing with an invalid buffer.
regards, tom lane
