Magnus Hagander <mag...@hagander.net> writes:
> On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 4:39 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> (The right fix, of course, is to malloc the work buffer rather than
>> put it on the stack.)
> So if I get you right, you're saying the attached patch should be all
> that's needed?
Well, that's some of what's needed. I notice this code is also being
sloppy about whether block numbers are signed or unsigned, which means
it'd probably misbehave on relations exceeding 2^31 blocks. I have
a patch in progress to clean all that up, though I'm still working
on the strict-aliasing part.
regards, tom lane
