Re: Small optimization with expanding dynamic hash table
cca5507 <cca5507@qq.com>
From: cca5507 <cca5507@qq.com>
To: Rahila Syed <rahilasyed90@gmail.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2025-07-08T11:56:50Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
> One thing to note is that in this scenario, there is no safeguard if the hashvalue is 0x111 and new_bucket is 0x110. But the hash table is already corrupted if the hashvalue 0x111 in old_bucket 0x010, all hashvalue in old_bucket should have: hashvalue & low_mask == old_bucket's no. -- Regards, ChangAo Chen