Re: BUG #17855: Uninitialised memory used when the name type value processed in binary mode of Memoize
От | Peter Geoghegan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: BUG #17855: Uninitialised memory used when the name type value processed in binary mode of Memoize |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAH2-Wzmgj8Mqu6YV705jBexQ_j27vamfJ_yDbwzUpgtMgkzfUQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: BUG #17855: Uninitialised memory used when the name type value processed in binary mode of Memoize (David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: BUG #17855: Uninitialised memory used when the name type value processed in binary mode of Memoize
|
Список | pgsql-bugs |
On Wed, Mar 22, 2023 at 8:11 PM David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com> wrote: > A relevant comment is in StoreIndexTuple(): > > /* > * Note: we must use the tupdesc supplied by the AM in index_deform_tuple, > * not the slot's tupdesc, in case the latter has different datatypes > * (this happens for btree name_ops in particular). They'd better have > * the same number of columns though, as well as being datatype-compatible > * which is something we can't so easily check. > */ > > I'm just not really certain if we can say name is > "datatype-compatible" with cstring or not. It seems that namehash, > namecmp, nameout etc are all coded so that they can accept cstrings as > inputs. It's just not going to be safe for anything that wants to > access all of the NAMEDATALEN bytes. I doubt that there is a clear answer to that question. Have you seen the comments about the cstring/name_ops hack mentioning a SIGSEGV in btrescan()? Those were added around the time index-only scans first went in. -- Peter Geoghegan
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: