Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Yeah, the correct TID value would be > ItemPointerGetBlockNumber(tid) plus the current offnum. Thanks! > However we don't have enough information in this function to set > t_tableOid correctly, so maybe it would be best to just set both > fields invalid. Or do nothing --- AFAICS none of the uses of the > heapTuple look at those fields. Is it worth a few extra cycles to > initialize unused fields of a short-lived heapTuple? At a minimum, it might be good to qualify the comment in htup.h and add a comment where there is an exception. This can be startling in a debugger if you don't know that the comment isn't really true. (And I've found another place where t_tableOid isn't set, but it is apparently benign; that's without an exhaustive search.) I could put forward a comment-only patch per the above if there are no objections. -Kevin
-- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
