Hello Robert,
21.08.2024 17:29, Robert Haas wrote:
> I went ahead and committed these patches. ...
Please take a look at the following code:
static void
label_sort_with_costsize(PlannerInfo *root, Sort *plan, double limit_tuples)
{
...
cost_sort(&sort_path, root, NIL,
lefttree->total_cost,
plan->plan.disabled_nodes,
lefttree->plan_rows,
lefttree->plan_width,
0.0,
work_mem,
limit_tuples);
Given the cost_sort() declaration:
void
cost_sort(Path *path, PlannerInfo *root,
List *pathkeys, int input_disabled_nodes,
Cost input_cost, double tuples, int width,
Cost comparison_cost, int sort_mem,
double limit_tuples)
Aren't the input_disabled_nodes and input_cost arguments swapped in the
above call?
(I've discovered this with UBSan, which complained
createplan.c:5457:6: runtime error: 4.40465e+09 is outside the range of representable values of type 'int'
while executing a query with a large estimated cost.)
Best regards,
Alexander
