Re: Nitpicking: unnecessary NULL-pointer check in pg_upgrade's controldata.c - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: Nitpicking: unnecessary NULL-pointer check in pg_upgrade's controldata.c
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmoadYY6n7DL4-SybPUb-xZikMY4aOvxA-ap9YsfUhzKJJw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Nitpicking: unnecessary NULL-pointer check in pg_upgrade's controldata.c  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
Responses Re: Nitpicking: unnecessary NULL-pointer check in pg_upgrade's controldata.c  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 9:49 AM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
> On 2015-06-26 09:44:14 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>> I don't mind committing patches for this kind of thing if it makes the
>> Coverity reports easier to deal with, which I gather that it does.
>
> It takes about three seconds to mark it as ignored which will hide it
> going forward.

So what?  That doesn't help if someone *else* sets up a Coverity run
on this code base, or if say Salesforce sets up such a run on their
fork of the code base.  It's much better to fix the problem at the
root.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: Should we back-patch SSL renegotiation fixes?
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: Redesigning checkpoint_segments