Hi, On March 31, 2020 12:43:47 AM PDT, Mahendra Singh Thalor <[email protected]> wrote: >On Mon, 30 Mar 2020 at 09:44, Amit Kapila <[email protected]> >wrote: >> >> On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 4:18 AM Andres Freund <[email protected]> >wrote: >> > >> > > 2076 >> > > 2077 if ((shared_balance >= VacuumCostLimit) && >> > > >>> CID ...: Incorrect expression >(UNINTENDED_INTEGER_DIVISION) >> > > >>> Dividing integer expressions "VacuumCostLimit" and >"nworkers", and then converting the integer quotient to type "double". >Any remainder, or fractional part of the quotient, is ignored. >> > > 2078 (VacuumCostBalanceLocal > 0.5 * >(VacuumCostLimit / nworkers))) >> > > 2079 { >> > > 2080 /* Compute sleep time based on the local >cost balance */ >> > > 2081 msec = VacuumCostDelay * >VacuumCostBalanceLocal / VacuumCostLimit; >> > > 2082 >pg_atomic_sub_fetch_u32(VacuumSharedCostBalance, >VacuumCostBalanceLocal); >> > > 2083 VacuumCostBalanceLocal = 0; >> > >> > Which seems like a fair enough complaint? >> > >> >> Yeah, how can we set up and test a fix for this? Where can I see >these results? > >I am able to make coverity setup. I am verifying fix and will post my >results in coming days.
That doesn't seem necessary - we should commit a fix. We'll know in a few days for sure. But it's not hard to just theoretically look at the issue in this case? Andres -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
