> On Aug 15, 2025, at 12:37 AM, David Rowley <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Fri, 15 Aug 2025 at 15:24, Tom Lane <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> David Rowley <[email protected]> writes: >>> I'm happy to push Greg's v5 patch if you have no counterarguments. >> >> In the end this isn't something I find worth arguing about. If >> you prefer v5, sure. I do suggest though that if we're installing >> Asserts at all, defending against prevbit < -1 is worth doing.
Agreed, that's a reasonable addition. > Agreed about defending against prevbit < -1. I added an Assert for > that. Technically, that Assert could be up above the if (a == NULL) > check, but I didn't think it mattered that much and opted to keep both > Asserts together. The difference being that bms_prev_member(NULL, -2) > will return -2 rather than Assert fail. I'm not too worried about > that, but if you feel strongly differently, I can adjust what I just > pushed. Thanks for adding that Assert. I don't think it's worth relocating at this time. I'll post the addition of tests in a new thread. I hope you both have interest and time to review that as well. > David Thanks David for pushing the commit! :) best. -greg
