Ranier Vilela <ranier.vf@gmail.com> writes:
> Em seg., 12 de abr. de 2021 às 03:04, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> escreveu:
>> It would be wrong, though, or at least not have the same effect.
> I think that you speak about fill pointers with 0 is not the same as fill
> pointers with NULL.
No, I mean that InvalidBlockNumber isn't 0.
> I was confused here, does the patch follow the pattern and fix the problem
> or not?
Your patch seems fine. Justin's proposed improvement isn't.
(I'm not real sure whether there's any *actual* bug here --- would we
really be looking at either ctid or tableoid of this temporary tuple?
But it's probably best to ensure that they're valid anyway.)
regards, tom lane