On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 8:56 AM, Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote:
> That made me wonder if it's not actually a mistake for
> MemoryContextAllocExtended() size parameter to be declared
> Size/size_t. That prevents it from detecting such overflows, forcing
> code like the above on callsites.
> Comments?

The existing interface of MemoryContextAlloc do not care much about
anything except Size, so I'd just give the responsability to the
caller to do checks like queue != (Size) queue when queue is a uint64
for example. And I can see that your patch is using uint32 for

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to