I wrote: > "John Regehr" <reg...@cs.utah.edu> writes: >> During a "make check" the left-shift operator at tsquery_util.c 48:18 is >> passed a negative right-hand argument a number of times.
> Hmm. valcrc is declared as signed int32, so depending on what your > compiler thinks the semantics of % is, this clearly can potentially > happen. I notice the same problem in makeTSQuerySign() in tsquery_op.c. On further investigation, the reason makeTSQuerySign didn't show up in John's test is that it's coded like this: sign |= ((TSQuerySign) 1) << (ptr->qoperand.valcrc % TSQS_SIGLEN); where TSQS_SIGLEN is a macro that involves sizeof(TSQuerySign), and therefore will produce an unsigned result (on most machines anyway). So the % is done in unsigned arithmetic and there's no problem. I think it'd still be a good idea to cast valcrc to unsigned int explicitly here, but this is just for future-proofing not because there's a real bug ATM. Which is a good thing, because TSQuerySign does go to disk so we'd have a backwards-compatibility mess if we had to change this computation. The problem in QT2QTN() is real, on the other hand, because it's coded as node->sign = 1 << (in->qoperand.valcrc % 32); so the modulo is signed. Some investigation shows that Intel machines seem to give the right answer anyway, which has masked the problem for most people. But I find that on PPC, the result of the shift is *zero* if valcrc is negative --- haven't checked, but I wonder if that hardware interprets a negative left shift as a right shift. So on PPC the "sign" comes out as zero about half the time. As best I can tell at the moment, this only results in some inefficiency (because the Bloom filters don't work as intended) in some not-too- heavily-used operations; and the QTNode structures aren't written to disk so there's no compatibility issue from fixing the computation. To sum up: we should insert these casts in HEAD but at the moment I don't see a strong reason to back-patch, nor any indication that we'd be creating a need for a forced initdb. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs