Re: [dynahash] do not refill the hashkey after hash_search - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Oct 25, 2023 at 12:21 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>
> John Naylor <johncnaylorls@gmail.com> writes:
> > I'd prefer just adding "Assert(hentry->event == oldn);" and declaring
> > hentry PG_USED_FOR_ASSERTS_ONLY.
>
> I'm not aware of any other places where we have Asserts checking
> that hash_search() honored its contract.  Why do we need one here?

[removing old CC]
The author pointed out here that we're not consistent in this regard:

https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAEG8a3KEO_Kdt2Y5hFNWMEX3DpCXi9jtZOJY-GFUEE9QLgF%2Bbw%40mail.gmail.com

...but I didn't try seeing where the balance lay. We can certainly
just remove redundant assignments.