Re: BUG #17792: MERGE uses uninitialized pointer and crashes when target tuple is updated concurrently
От | Alvaro Herrera |
---|---|
Тема | Re: BUG #17792: MERGE uses uninitialized pointer and crashes when target tuple is updated concurrently |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20230214112933.cshqgnzpcioedizy@alvherre.pgsql обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | BUG #17792: MERGE uses uninitialized pointer and crashes when target tuple is updated concurrently (PG Bug reporting form <noreply@postgresql.org>) |
Ответы |
Re: BUG #17792: MERGE uses uninitialized pointer and crashes when target tuple is updated concurrently
Re: BUG #17792: MERGE uses uninitialized pointer and crashes when target tuple is updated concurrently |
Список | pgsql-bugs |
On 2023-Feb-14, PG Bug reporting form wrote: > When executing the following queries with valgrind: > echo " > CREATE TABLE source (sid integer); > INSERT INTO source VALUES (1); > CREATE TABLE target (tid integer, tval integer); > INSERT INTO target VALUES (1, 1); > " | psql > At nodeModifyTable.c:2992 I see: > if (!TupIsNull(context->cpUpdateRetrySlot)) > > It looks like cpUpdateRetrySlot was not initialized on the context creation > in ExecModifyTable(), and ExecCrossPartitionUpdate(), where it could get a > value, just not called for this case. Hmm, yeah: because this is not a partitioned table, we are definitely not expecting that cpUpdateRetrySlot will be set. Can you still reproduce the problem with the attached patch? I'm not sure that the location of the initialization is best. My first impulse was to add it in line 3618, with the "Set global context" lines; but then I think it's possible for one tuple of a partition to be routed correctly and a later one that is concurrently updated suffer from an improper value in cpUpdateRetrySlot. Also, the comment is not great ... -- Álvaro Herrera 48°01'N 7°57'E — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
Вложения
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: