Ranier Vilela <ranier...@gmail.com> writes: > Em seg., 12 de abr. de 2021 às 03:04, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> escreveu: >> It would be wrong, though, or at least not have the same effect.
> I think that you speak about fill pointers with 0 is not the same as fill > pointers with NULL. No, I mean that InvalidBlockNumber isn't 0. > I was confused here, does the patch follow the pattern and fix the problem > or not? Your patch seems fine. Justin's proposed improvement isn't. (I'm not real sure whether there's any *actual* bug here --- would we really be looking at either ctid or tableoid of this temporary tuple? But it's probably best to ensure that they're valid anyway.) regards, tom lane