Re: Add Index-level REINDEX with multiple jobs
От | Richard Guo |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Add Index-level REINDEX with multiple jobs |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAMbWs4842BYgnBoSuxksj9aHfvzh9fVFEdC63hzqUBP5YK+RrQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Add Index-level REINDEX with multiple jobs (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Add Index-level REINDEX with multiple jobs
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 10:07 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com> writes:
> Here goes the revised patch. I'm going to push this if there are no objections.
Quite a lot of the buildfarm is complaining about this:
reindexdb.c: In function 'reindex_one_database':
reindexdb.c:434:54: error: 'indices_tables_cell' may be used uninitialized in this function [-Werror=maybe-uninitialized]
434 | strcmp(prev_index_table_name, indices_tables_cell->val) == 0)
| ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~^~~~~
I noticed it first on mamba, which is set up with -Werror, but a
scrape of the buildfarm logs shows many other animals reporting this
as a warning.
I noticed the similar warning on cfbot:
https://cirrus-ci.com/task/6298504306360320?logs=gcc_warning#L448
reindexdb.c: In function ‘reindex_one_database’:
reindexdb.c:437:24: error: ‘indices_tables_cell’ may be used uninitialized in this function [-Werror=maybe-uninitialized]
437 | indices_tables_cell = indices_tables_cell->next;
| ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Although it's complaining on line 437 not 434, I think they are the same
issue.
https://cirrus-ci.com/task/6298504306360320?logs=gcc_warning#L448
reindexdb.c: In function ‘reindex_one_database’:
reindexdb.c:437:24: error: ‘indices_tables_cell’ may be used uninitialized in this function [-Werror=maybe-uninitialized]
437 | indices_tables_cell = indices_tables_cell->next;
| ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Although it's complaining on line 437 not 434, I think they are the same
issue.
I think they are right. Even granting that the
compiler realizes that "parallel && process_type == REINDEX_INDEX" is
enough to reach the one place where indices_tables_cell is
initialized, that's not really enough, because that place is
if (indices_tables_list)
indices_tables_cell = indices_tables_list->head;
So I believe this code will crash if get_parallel_object_list returns
an empty list. Initializing indices_tables_cell to NULL in its
declaration would stop the compiler warning, but if I'm right it
will do nothing to prevent that crash. This needs a bit more effort.
Agreed. And the comment of get_parallel_object_list() says that it may
indeed return NULL.
BTW, on line 373, it checks 'process_list' and bails out if this list is
NULL. But it seems to me that 'process_list' cannot be NULL in this
case, because it's initialized to be 'user_list' and we have asserted
that user_list is not NULL on line 360. I wonder if we should check
indices_tables_list instead of process_list on line 373.
Thanks
Richard
indeed return NULL.
BTW, on line 373, it checks 'process_list' and bails out if this list is
NULL. But it seems to me that 'process_list' cannot be NULL in this
case, because it's initialized to be 'user_list' and we have asserted
that user_list is not NULL on line 360. I wonder if we should check
indices_tables_list instead of process_list on line 373.
Thanks
Richard
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: