Re: Error in recent pg_dump change (coverity)

Alvaro Herrera wrote:

> Done.  They were actually four, not five.  The one I mistakingly though
> was one was the notice processor hooks.
> 
> The case Martijn was saying would be warned about by the memset
> approach, setting ntuples to 0, would actually be handled as a segfault,
> because functions like check_field_number actually follow
> res.noticeHooks pointer!  ISTM we would just segfault at that point.

I must be blind.  The hooks->noticeRec == NULL case is handled first
thing in pgInternalNotice (returns doing nothing).  So we wouldn't
segfault and we wouldn't emit any warning either!

-- 
Alvaro Herrera                                http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.