Re: replication cleanup code incorrect way to use of HTAB HASH_REMOVE ?

On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 10:50 AM Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com> wrote:
> The real problem isn't the Assert. It's all those other usages of ent
> disobeying the API rule: "(NB: in the case of the REMOVE action, the
> result is a dangling pointer that shouldn't be dereferenced!)"

I suppose the HASH_REMOVE case could clobber the object with 0x7f if
CLOBBER_FREED_MEMORY is defined (typically assertion builds), or
alternatively return some other non-NULL but poisoned pointer, so that
problems of this ilk  blow up in early testing.