On 4/12/21 6:55 PM, Ranier Vilela wrote:
>
>
> Em seg., 12 de abr. de 2021 às 03:04, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us
> <mailto:tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>> escreveu:
>
> Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz <mailto:michael@paquier.xyz>>
> writes:
> > On Sun, Apr 11, 2021 at 07:42:20PM -0300, Ranier Vilela wrote:
> >> Em dom., 11 de abr. de 2021 às 16:25, Justin Pryzby
> <pryzby@telsasoft.com <mailto:pryzby@telsasoft.com>>
> >>> I think it's cleanest to write:
> >>> |HeapTupleData tmptup = {0};
>
> > I agree that this would be cleaner.
>
> It would be wrong, though, or at least not have the same effect.
>
> I think that you speak about fill pointers with 0 is not the same as
> fill pointers with NULL.
>
>
> ItemPointerSetInvalid does not set the target to all-zeroes.
>
> ItemPointerSetInvalid set or not set the target to all-zeroes?
>
Not sure what exactly are you asking about? What Tom said is that if you
do 'struct = {0}' it sets all fields to 0, but we only want/need to set
the t_self/t_tableOid fields to 0.
>
> (Regardless of that detail, it's generally best to accomplish
> objective X in the same way that existing code does. Deciding
> that you have a better way is often wrong, and even if you
> are right, you should then submit a patch to change all the
> existing cases.)
>
> I was confused here, does the patch follow the pattern and fix the
> problem or not?
>
I believe it does, and it's doing it in the same way as most other
similar places.
regards
--
Tomas Vondra
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
