Re: Can rs_cindex be < 0 for bitmap heap scans? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers
From | Ranier Vilela |
---|---|
Subject | Re: Can rs_cindex be < 0 for bitmap heap scans? |
Date | |
Msg-id | CAEudQApBnAQsBwKYGU=c-KuEPunfUqyRm14K8zufC858b3VeFQ@mail.gmail.com Whole thread Raw |
In response to | Re: Can rs_cindex be < 0 for bitmap heap scans? (Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman@gmail.com>) |
List | pgsql-hackers |
Em qui., 19 de dez. de 2024 às 19:50, Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman@gmail.com> escreveu:
On Wed, Dec 18, 2024 at 9:50 PM Richard Guo <guofenglinux@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2024 at 8:18 AM Melanie Plageman
> <melanieplageman@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I pushed the straightforward option for now so that it's fixed.
>
> I think this binary search code now has a risk of underflow. If 'mid'
> is calculated as zero, the second 'if' branch will cause 'end' to
> underflow.
Thanks, Richard!
> Maybe we need to do something like below.
>
> --- a/src/backend/access/heap/heapam_handler.c
> +++ b/src/backend/access/heap/heapam_handler.c
> @@ -2600,7 +2600,11 @@ SampleHeapTupleVisible(TableScanDesc scan, Buffer buffer,
> if (tupoffset == curoffset)
> return true;
> else if (tupoffset < curoffset)
> + {
> + if (mid == 0)
> + return false;
> end = mid - 1;
> + }
> else
> start = mid + 1;
> }
>
> Alternatively, we can revert 'start' and 'end' to signed int as they
> were before.
What about this instead:
diff --git a/src/backend/access/heap/heapam_handler.c
b/src/backend/access/heap/heapam_handler.c
index 2da4e4da13e..fb90fd869c2 100644
--- a/src/backend/access/heap/heapam_handler.c
+++ b/src/backend/access/heap/heapam_handler.c
@@ -2574,11 +2574,8 @@ SampleHeapTupleVisible(TableScanDesc scan, Buffer buffer,
if (scan->rs_flags & SO_ALLOW_PAGEMODE)
{
- uint32 start,
- end;
-
- if (hscan->rs_ntuples == 0)
- return false;
+ uint32 start = 0,
+ end = hscan->rs_ntuples;
/*
* In pageatatime mode, heap_prepare_pagescan() already did visibility
@@ -2589,10 +2586,8 @@ SampleHeapTupleVisible(TableScanDesc scan, Buffer buffer,
* in increasing order, but it's not clear that there would be enough
* gain to justify the restriction.
*/
- start = 0;
- end = hscan->rs_ntuples - 1;
- while (start <= end)
+ while (start < end)
{
uint32 mid = (start + end) / 2;
OffsetNumber curoffset = hscan->rs_vistuples[mid];
@@ -2600,7 +2595,7 @@ SampleHeapTupleVisible(TableScanDesc scan, Buffer buffer,
if (tupoffset == curoffset)
return true;
else if (tupoffset < curoffset)
- end = mid - 1;
+ end = mid;
else
start = mid + 1;
}
Or to make it easier to read, here:
uint32 start = 0,
end = hscan->rs_ntuples;
while (start < end)
{
uint32 mid = (start + end) / 2;
OffsetNumber curoffset = hscan->rs_vistuples[mid];
if (tupoffset == curoffset)
return true;
else if (tupoffset < curoffset)
end = mid;
else
start = mid + 1;
}
I think this gets rid of any subtraction and is still the same.
Look goods to me.
I think that you propose, can get rid of the early test too.
Note the way we can avoid an overflow in the mid calculation.
diff --git a/src/backend/access/heap/heapam_handler.c b/src/backend/access/heap/heapam_handler.c
index 9f17baea5d..bd1335276a 100644
--- a/src/backend/access/heap/heapam_handler.c
+++ b/src/backend/access/heap/heapam_handler.c
@@ -2577,9 +2577,6 @@ SampleHeapTupleVisible(TableScanDesc scan, Buffer buffer,
uint32 start,
end;
- if (hscan->rs_ntuples == 0)
- return false;
-
/*
* In pageatatime mode, heap_prepare_pagescan() already did visibility
* checks, so just look at the info it left in rs_vistuples[].
@@ -2590,17 +2587,17 @@ SampleHeapTupleVisible(TableScanDesc scan, Buffer buffer,
* gain to justify the restriction.
*/
start = 0;
- end = hscan->rs_ntuples - 1;
+ end = hscan->rs_ntuples;
- while (start <= end)
+ while (start < end)
{
- uint32 mid = (start + end) / 2;
+ uint32 mid = (start + end) >> 1;
OffsetNumber curoffset = hscan->rs_vistuples[mid];
if (tupoffset == curoffset)
return true;
else if (tupoffset < curoffset)
- end = mid - 1;
+ end = mid;
else
start = mid + 1;
}
index 9f17baea5d..bd1335276a 100644
--- a/src/backend/access/heap/heapam_handler.c
+++ b/src/backend/access/heap/heapam_handler.c
@@ -2577,9 +2577,6 @@ SampleHeapTupleVisible(TableScanDesc scan, Buffer buffer,
uint32 start,
end;
- if (hscan->rs_ntuples == 0)
- return false;
-
/*
* In pageatatime mode, heap_prepare_pagescan() already did visibility
* checks, so just look at the info it left in rs_vistuples[].
@@ -2590,17 +2587,17 @@ SampleHeapTupleVisible(TableScanDesc scan, Buffer buffer,
* gain to justify the restriction.
*/
start = 0;
- end = hscan->rs_ntuples - 1;
+ end = hscan->rs_ntuples;
- while (start <= end)
+ while (start < end)
{
- uint32 mid = (start + end) / 2;
+ uint32 mid = (start + end) >> 1;
OffsetNumber curoffset = hscan->rs_vistuples[mid];
if (tupoffset == curoffset)
return true;
else if (tupoffset < curoffset)
- end = mid - 1;
+ end = mid;
else
start = mid + 1;
}
best regards,
Ranier Vilela
pgsql-hackers by date: