D'Arcy J.M. Cain <darcy@druid.net>
> Although, the more I think about it, the more I think that the comment
> is both confusing and superfluous. The code itself is much clearer.
Seriously, if there is any comment there at all, it should be a
succinct explanation for why we didn't do this (which passes `make
check-world`):
--- a/src/backend/access/common/heaptuple.c
+++ b/src/backend/access/common/heaptuple.c
@@ -1323,6 +1323,8 @@ slot_attisnull(TupleTableSlot *slot, int attnum)
HeapTuple tuple = slot->tts_tuple;
TupleDesc tupleDesc = slot->tts_tupleDescriptor;
+ Assert(attnum <= tupleDesc->natts);
+
/*
* system attributes are handled by heap_attisnull
*/
@@ -1342,12 +1344,6 @@ slot_attisnull(TupleTableSlot *slot, int attnum)
return slot->tts_isnull[attnum - 1];
/*
- * return NULL if attnum is out of range according to the tupdesc
- */
- if (attnum > tupleDesc->natts)
- return true;
-
- /*
* otherwise we had better have a physical tuple (tts_nvalid should equal
* natts in all virtual-tuple cases)
*/
--
Kevin Grittner
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
