Re: Worth using personality(ADDR_NO_RANDOMIZE) for EXEC_BACKEND on linux?
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Worth using personality(ADDR_NO_RANDOMIZE) for EXEC_BACKEND on linux? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 8115.1628805578@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Worth using personality(ADDR_NO_RANDOMIZE) for EXEC_BACKEND on linux? (Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Worth using personality(ADDR_NO_RANDOMIZE) for EXEC_BACKEND on linux?
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com> writes: > On Fri, Aug 13, 2021 at 3:13 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> I don't see why that approach couldn't be incorporated into pg_ctl, >> or the postmaster itself. Given Andres' point that Linux ASLR >> disable probably has to happen in pg_ctl, it seems like doing it >> in pg_ctl in all cases is the way to move forward. > I think doing it in the postmaster is best, since otherwise you have > to put code into pg_regress.c and pg_ctl.c. Here's a patch like that. Hmm, ok. Small thought: it might be better to put the #if inside the "else { .... }". That way it scales easily to allow other platform-specific defaults if we find anything useful. As-is, the obvious extension would end up with multiple else-blocks, which seems likely to confuse pgindent if nothing else. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: