Re: Bug in batch tuplesort memory CLUSTER case (9.6 only)
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Bug in batch tuplesort memory CLUSTER case (9.6 only) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+TgmoYgz44PbhW5Ohsvn39SCShL1LUFzw4+szuEfC0wYOjHTw@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Bug in batch tuplesort memory CLUSTER case (9.6 only) (Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Bug in batch tuplesort memory CLUSTER case (9.6 only)
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 12:06 AM, Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com> wrote: > On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 09:14:05PM -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote: >> In general, moving tuplesort.c batch memory caller tuples around >> happens when batch memory needs to be recycled, or freed outright with >> pfree(). >> >> I failed to take into account that CLUSTER tuplesorts need an extra >> step when moving caller tuples to a new location (i.e. when moving >> HeapTuple caller tuples using memmove()), because their particular >> variety of caller tuple happens to itself contain a pointer to >> palloc()'d memory. Attached patch fixes this use-after-free bug. > > [Action required within 72 hours. This is a generic notification.] > > The above-described topic is currently a PostgreSQL 9.6 open item. Robert, > since you committed the patch believed to have created it, you own this open > item. If some other commit is more relevant or if this does not belong as a > 9.6 open item, please let us know. Otherwise, please observe the policy on > open item ownership[1] and send a status update within 72 hours of this > message. Include a date for your subsequent status update. Testers may > discover new open items at any time, and I want to plan to get them all fixed > well in advance of shipping 9.6rc1. Consequently, I will appreciate your > efforts toward speedy resolution. Thanks. > > [1] http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20160527025039.GA447393@tornado.leadboat.com The proposed patch contains no test case and no description of how to reproduce the problem. I am not very keen on the idea of trying to puzzle that out from first principles. Also, I would appreciate a clearer explanation of why this only affects CLUSTER tuplesorts. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: