| From: | Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk> |
|---|---|
| To: | Oleg Jurtšenko <oleg(dot)jurtsenko(at)fts(dot)ee> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: BUG #5235: Segmentation fault under high load through JDBC |
| Date: | 2009-12-09 15:56:23 |
| Message-ID: | 877hsw9mrz.fsf@news-spur.riddles.org.uk |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
>>>>> "Andrew" == Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk> writes:
Andrew> What are the definitions of your instr() and ad_parent_tree()
Andrew> functions?
Well, there's so much wrong with that ad_parent_tree function - it's
always going to recurse infinitely (with a new subxact per recursion
level, even) regardless of the data, and the only thing that will stop
it is when it throws an exception due to reaching the max stack depth
- and it then CATCHES that exception and returns.
Still, even though the code is preposterous, the result shouldn't be a
segfault. I wasn't able to reproduce one myself (using 8.3.7 on
freebsd 7.2) however.
--
Andrew (irc:RhodiumToad)
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2009-12-09 16:11:31 | Re: BUG #5235: Segmentation fault under high load through JDBC |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2009-12-09 14:43:09 | Re: BUG #5235: Segmentation fault under high load through JDBC |