Em sex., 14 de fev. de 2025 às 09:13, Ranier Vilela <ranier...@gmail.com> escreveu:
> Hi Álvaro. > > Em qui., 13 de fev. de 2025 às 18:38, Álvaro Herrera < > alvhe...@alvh.no-ip.org> escreveu: > >> On 2025-Feb-13, Ranier Vilela wrote: >> >> > Hi. >> > >> > Coverity complained about possible dereference null pointer >> > in *reindex_one_database* function. >> > That's not really true. >> > But the logic is unnecessarily complicated. >> >> Hmm, this code looks quite suspect, but I wonder if instead of (what >> looks more or less like) a straight revert of cc0e7ebd304a as you >> propose, a better fix wouldn't be to split get_parallel_object_list in >> two: get_parallel_table_list for the DATABASE and SCHEMA cases, and >> get_parallel_tabidx_list (or whatever) for the INDEX case. In the first >> case we just return a list of values, but in the latter case we also >> meddle with the input list which becomes an output list ... >> > Sure, I'll try to do it. > Attached is the prototype version v1. What do you think? best regards, Ranier Vilela
v1-simplifies-reindex-one-database-reindexdb.patch
Description: Binary data
