Re: IndexTupleDSize macro seems redundant - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: IndexTupleDSize macro seems redundant
Date
Msg-id CA+Tgmob9dOFWN2qrhB_HxY4szv1KKNjvY1KfPC7esyMq__TvDQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: IndexTupleDSize macro seems redundant  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 1:26 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> I certainly hadn't been thinking about that.  I didn't see any
>> issues in my testing (where I created a table with a btree index and
>> insert'd a bunch of records into and then killed the server, forcing WAL
>> replay and then checked that the index appeared to be valid using order
>> by queries; perhaps I should have tried amcheck, but doesn't sound like
>> this is something that would have been guaranteed to break anyway).
>
> You wouldn't see a problem, unless you tested on alignment-picky
> hardware, ie, not Intel.
>
> I wonder whether there is a way to get alignment traps on Intel-type
> hardware.  It's getting less and less likely that most hackers are
> developing on anything else, so that we don't see gotchas of this
> type until code hits the buildfarm (and even then, only if the case
> is actually exercised in regression testing).

-fsanitize=alignment?

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


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: refactor subscription tests to use PostgresNode'swait_for_catchup
Next
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Proposal: Local indexes for partitioned table