Re: BUG #18135: Incorrect memory access occurs when attaching a partition with an index
От | Michael Paquier |
---|---|
Тема | Re: BUG #18135: Incorrect memory access occurs when attaching a partition with an index |
Дата | |
Msg-id | ZRTzX0h68fxZ5Dth@paquier.xyz обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | BUG #18135: Incorrect memory access occurs when attaching a partition with an index (PG Bug reporting form <noreply@postgresql.org>) |
Ответы |
Re: BUG #18135: Incorrect memory access occurs when attaching a partition with an index
|
Список | pgsql-bugs |
On Wed, Sep 27, 2023 at 10:00:01AM +0000, PG Bug reporting form wrote: > executed under Valgrind, it leads to an incorrect memory access: > ==00:00:00:03.947 396156== Invalid read of size 2 > ==00:00:00:03.947 396156== at 0x2E323D: CompareIndexInfo (index.c:2572) > ==00:00:00:03.947 396156== by 0x3D009B: AttachPartitionEnsureIndexes > (tablecmds.c:18797) > ==00:00:00:03.947 396156== by 0x3D8B4F: ATExecAttachPartition > (tablecmds.c:18578) > ==00:00:00:03.947 396156== by 0x3D9A88: ATExecCmd (tablecmds.c:5379) > ==00:00:00:03.947 396156== by 0x3D9BC7: ATRewriteCatalogs > (tablecmds.c:5063) I have just tested that on HEAD and REL_16_STABLE, but fail to see this report, which is weird (3.19.0 here). Are you using any specific option of valgrind I should be aware of? Here is what I used, for reference: valgrind \ --suppressions=$PG_SOURCE/src/tools/valgrind.supp \ --trace-children=yes --track-origins=yes --read-var-info=yes \ postgres -D REST_OF_ARGS > The function CompareIndexInfo() contains the code: > /* ignore expressions at this stage */ > if ((info1->ii_IndexAttrNumbers[i] != InvalidAttrNumber) && > (attmap->attnums[info2->ii_IndexAttrNumbers[i] - 1] != > info1->ii_IndexAttrNumbers[i])) > return false; > > where info1->ii_IndexAttrNumbers[i] is checked for InvalidAttrNumber > (i. e. it's not an expression), but info2->ii_IndexAttrNumbers[i] is not. Anyway, I can see your point here. info2's first attnum is 0 so we look at an imaginary position in attmap->attnums. So, yes, that's wrong. > In addition, there is a check whether both indexes are (are not) > expression indexes, but it's placed below... Sure, but this makes the check a bit cheaper if the indexes to compare use expr and non-expr attributes at the same attnums, no? Except if I am missing something, the attached should be sufficient. -- Michael
Вложения
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: