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 ...
--
Álvaro Herrera Breisgau, Deutschland — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
¡Ay, ay, ay! Con lo mucho que yo lo quería (bis)
se fue de mi vera ... se fue para siempre, pa toíta ... pa toíta la vida
¡Ay Camarón! ¡Ay Camarón! (Paco de Lucía)
