| From: | Anastasia Lubennikova <a(dot)lubennikova(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Masahiko Sawada <masahiko(dot)sawada(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Using Valgrind to detect faulty buffer accesses (no pin or buffer content lock held) |
| Date: | 2020-07-16 17:24:51 |
| Message-ID: | 7a51c88c-0eab-8409-42db-14c070d4d9d3@postgrespro.ru |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 02.07.2020 20:11, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 2, 2020 at 7:48 AM Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> wrote:
>> This patch fails to apply to HEAD due to conflicts in nbtpage.c, can you please
>> submit a rebased version?
> I attach the rebased patch series.
>
> Thanks
It's impressive that this check helped to find several bugs.
I only noticed small inconsistency in the new comment for
_bt_conditionallockbuf().
It says "Note: Caller is responsible for calling _bt_checkpage() on
success.", while in _bt_getbuf() the call is not followed by
_bt_checkpage().
Moreover, _bt_page_recyclable() contradicts _bt_checkpage() checks.
Other than that, patches look good to me, so move them to "Ready For
Committer".
Are you planning to add same checks for other access methods?
--
Anastasia Lubennikova
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2020-07-16 18:58:13 | Wrong results from in_range() tests with infinite offset |
| Previous Message | vignesh C | 2020-07-16 17:13:51 | Re: Parallel copy |