On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 9:33 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Andrew Dunstan <and...@dunslane.net> writes: >>> Amit Kapila escribió: >>>> 1>.\src\backend\utils\cache\relfilenodemap.c(213) : warning C4101: >>>> 'isnull' : unreferenced local variable > >> The macro is pretty gcc-specific, isn't it? > > If that's the problem, why isn't Amit seeing a boatload of similar > warnings elsewhere?
If I try to change other place similar to relfilenodemap.c, I am getting similar warning. For example: Original Code -------------------- ExecMaterial() { .. /* * Allocate a second read pointer to serve as the mark. We know it * must have index 1, so needn't store that. */ int ptrno PG_USED_FOR_ASSERTS_ONLY; ptrno = tuplestore_alloc_read_pointer(tuplestorestate, node->eflags); Assert(ptrno == 1); .. } Modified Code --------------------- ExecMaterial() { .. /* * Allocate a second read pointer to serve as the mark. We know it * must have index 1, so needn't store that. */ int ptrno PG_USED_FOR_ASSERTS_ONLY; #ifdef USE_ASSERT_CHECKING ptrno = tuplestore_alloc_read_pointer(tuplestorestate, node->eflags); Assert(ptrno == 1); #endif .. } After above modification it gives below compilation error: 1>.\src\backend\executor\nodeMaterial.c(69) : warning C4101: 'ptrno' : unreferenced local variable Coming to original warning, changing the code as below removes warning: RelidByRelfilenode() { .. #ifdef USE_ASSERT_CHECKING if (assert_enabled) { Oid check; bool isnull PG_USED_FOR_ASSERTS_ONLY; check = fastgetattr(ntp, Anum_pg_class_reltablespace, RelationGetDescr(relation), &isnull); Assert(!isnull && check == reltablespace); check = fastgetattr(ntp, Anum_pg_class_relfilenode, RelationGetDescr(relation), &isnull); Assert(!isnull && check == relfilenode); } #endif Moving isnull declaration inside if block resolves current compilation warning, I think in any case it is better to declare inside if block as it is used in that block only. I think resolving the bigger problem such that it should not give warning for such usage in MSVC is important, but can be dealt as a separate thread/patch. With Regards, Amit Kapila. EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers