On 2/12/15 10:54 PM, Michael Paquier wrote:
Hi all,When calling vacuum(), there is the following assertion using VACOPT_FREEZE: Assert((vacstmt->options & VACOPT_VACUUM) || !(vacstmt->options & (VACOPT_FULL | VACOPT_FREEZE))); I think that this should be changed with sanity checks based on the parameter values of freeze_* in VacuumStmt as we do not set up VACOPT_FREEZE when VACUUM is used without options in parenthesis, for something like that: Assert((vacstmt->options & VACOPT_VACUUM) || - !(vacstmt->options & (VACOPT_FULL | VACOPT_FREEZE))); + ((vacstmt->options & VACOPT_FULL) == 0 && + vacstmt->freeze_min_age < 0 && + vacstmt->freeze_table_age < 0 && + vacstmt->multixact_freeze_min_age < 0 && + vacstmt->multixact_freeze_table_age < 0)); This would also have the advantage to limit the use of VACOPT_FREEZE in the query parser. A patch is attached. Thoughts?
Looks good. Should we also assert that if VACOPT_FREEZE is set then all the other stuff is 0? I don't know what kind of sanity checks we normally try and put on the parser, but that seems like a possible hole.
-- Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
