On 05/05/17 16:56, Tom Lane wrote: > Petr Jelinek <petr.jeli...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: >> On 05/05/17 06:50, Tom Lane wrote: >>> Actually, looking around a bit there, it's not even clear why >>> we should be booby-trapping the value of an unchanged column in >>> the first place. So I'd say that not only is the code dubious >>> but the comment is inadequate too. > >> Hmm, as far as I can recollect this is just leftover debugging code that >> was intended to help ensure that we are checking the "changed" >> everywhere we are supposed to (since I changed handling of these >> structured quite a bit during development). Should be changed to NULL, >> that's what we usually do in this type of situation. > > So the comment should be something like "if the column is unchanged, > we should not attempt to access its value beyond this point. To > help catch any such attempts, set the string to NULL" ? >
Yes that sounds about right. We don't get any data for unchanged TOAST columns (that's limitation of logical decoding) so we better not touch them. -- Petr Jelinek http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
