On Thu, Nov 26, 2020 at 9:57 PM Peter Eisentraut < peter.eisentr...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> On 2020-11-26 14:27, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > On 2020-Nov-26, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > > >> The point of the patch is to have the range check somewhere. If you > just > >> cast it, then you won't notice out of range arguments. Note that other > >> contrib modules that take block numbers work the same way. > > > > I'm not saying not to do that; just saying we should not propagate it to > > places that don't need it. get_raw_page gets its page number from > > PG_GETARG_INT64(), and the range check should be there. But then it > > calls get_raw_page_internal, and it could pass a BlockNumber -- there's > > no need to pass an int64. So get_raw_page_internal does not need a > > range check. > > Yeah, I had it like that for a moment, but then you need to duplicate > the check in get_raw_page() and get_raw_page_fork(). I figured since > get_raw_page_internal() does all the other argument checking also, it > seems sensible to put the block range check there too. But it's not a > big deal either way. > FWIW, my 2c. Though I agree with both sides, I prefer get_raw_page_internal() accepting BlockNumber, since that's what it deals with and not the entire int8. -- Best Wishes, Ashutosh
