Re: small hstore bugfixes for 9.0 (w/patch)

>>>>> "Tom" == Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes:

 >> Two small fixes for hstore-new.
 >> The hstore_compat one is arguable as to what is the best approach; the
 >> assert that was there was just wrong, but I have been unable after
 >> considerable searching to find any architectures that would fail the
 >> check.

 Tom> [ scratches head... ]  It looks like that ought to be an
 Tom> immediate core-dump for old data, given an assert-enabled build.
 Tom> Are you saying it isn't?  How?

The assert was just wrong, as I said. (Obviously it somehow escaped
testing; it's possible that I did my original tests on a non-asserts
build by mistake.)

What I meant to say is that I couldn't find any architectures that
would fail what the check _should have been_.

The reason for dropping the assert and doing the check in actual code
is because if any platform does exist where the check fails, you'd
just get corrupt results in a non-asserts build. I figured it was
better to produce an actual error instead.

--
Andrew.