Em dom., 13 de set. de 2020 às 22:46, Michael Paquier
escreveu:
> On Sat, Sep 12, 2020 at 12:40:49PM +0200, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
> > agreed.
>
> Ok, done as ac673a1 then.
>
Thanks Michael.
regards,
Ranier Vilela
On Sat, Sep 12, 2020 at 12:40:49PM +0200, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
> agreed.
Ok, done as ac673a1 then.
--
Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Le sam. 12 sept. 2020 à 11:14, Michael Paquier a
écrit :
> On Fri, Sep 11, 2020 at 01:49:26PM +0200, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 11, 2020 at 1:39 PM Daniel Gustafsson
> wrote:
> >> Any reason not to bail early as per the attached?
> >
> > +1
>
> Makes sense to me. This has also the ad
On Fri, Sep 11, 2020 at 01:49:26PM +0200, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 11, 2020 at 1:39 PM Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>> Any reason not to bail early as per the attached?
>
> +1
Makes sense to me. This has also the advantage to cause a crash if
there is an attempt to refer to those empty a
On Fri, Sep 11, 2020 at 1:39 PM Daniel Gustafsson
wrote:
>
> Looking at a pg_dump patch I realized that when we call buildIndexArray
without
> having found objects to index, we still call pg_malloc with zero which in
turn
> mallocs 1 byte. The byte in question is of course negligable, but it does
On Fri, Sep 11, 2020 at 1:39 PM Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>
> Looking at a pg_dump patch I realized that when we call buildIndexArray
> without
> having found objects to index, we still call pg_malloc with zero which in turn
> mallocs 1 byte. The byte in question is of course negligable, but it d
Looking at a pg_dump patch I realized that when we call buildIndexArray without
having found objects to index, we still call pg_malloc with zero which in turn
mallocs 1 byte. The byte in question is of course negligable, but it does seem
cleaner to return early with NULL instead of returning an em
