Re: Avoid unecessary MemSet call (src/backend/utils/cache/relcache.c) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Ranier Vilela
Subject Re: Avoid unecessary MemSet call (src/backend/utils/cache/relcache.c)
Date
Msg-id CAEudQAphdTfepoaoEVjxAhBVyRcdVRQ-m1CTCSr2bbBaOgRWEA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Avoid unecessary MemSet call (src/backend/utils/cache/relcache.c)  (Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Em ter., 17 de mai. de 2022 às 20:18, Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com> escreveu:
On Tue, May 17, 2022 at 07:52:30PM -0300, Ranier Vilela wrote:
> I found, I believe, a serious problem of incorrect usage of the memset api.
> Historically, people have relied on using memset or MemSet, using the
> variable name as an argument for the sizeof.
> While it works correctly, for arrays, when it comes to pointers to
> structures, things go awry.

Knowing how sizeof() works is required before using it - the same is true for
pointers.

> So throughout the code there are these misuses.

Why do you think it's a misuse ?

Take the first one as an example.  It says:

        GenericCosts costs;
        MemSet(&costs, 0, sizeof(costs));

You sent a patch to change it to sizeof(GenericCosts).

But it's not a pointer, so they are the same.

Is that true for every change in your patch ?
It seems true, sorry.
Thanks Justin for pointing out my big mistake.

I hope this isn't all wasted work, but should I remove the 002 patch.

regards,
Ranier Vilela

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Avoid unecessary MemSet call (src/backend/utils/cache/relcache.c)
Next
From: Soumyadeep Chakraborty
Date:
Subject: ALTER TABLE SET ACCESS METHOD on partitioned tables