Hi,
On Fri, Nov 28, 2025 at 02:20:25PM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 28.11.25 10:06, Bertrand Drouvot wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 28, 2025 at 09:11:16AM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > > I think this whole thing could be simplified by overlaying a uint32 over
> > > "data" and just accessing the array fields normally. See attached patch.
> >
> > Indeed, that's a nice simplification.
> >
> > - data += sizeof(uint32) * 2;
> >
> > Is it safe? I mean could XLH_SPLIT_META_UPDATE_MASKS and XLH_SPLIT_META_UPDATE_SPLITPOINT
> > be set simultaneously?
>
> Yes, that's what was probably intended. But apparently not exercised in the
> tests.
>
> So maybe more like this patch.
+ uint32 lowmask = uidata[uidatacount++];
+ uint32 highmask = uidata[uidatacount++];
good idea! That way that's easier to add more branches/flags later if we need
to.
Also, I think that's safe thanks to XLogRecGetBlockData() returning a
MAXALIGNed buffer. Not sure if it's worth to add a comment. I think that a
comment was not needed with the original code as it was using memcpy() instead.
Except for the nit comment remark above, LGTM.
Regards,
--
Bertrand Drouvot
PostgreSQL Contributors Team
RDS Open Source Databases
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
