From: | Joel Roller <JRoller(at)rjobrien(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | "pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: BUG #8143: Backend segmentation fault in pg_trgm |
Date: | 2013-05-10 20:41:49 |
Message-ID: | 97108C92-6EBF-42E3-9262-E8C42B4E7DA8@rjobrien.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
That was quick. Applied the 91715e82932665 commit directly against the 9.2.4 pgdg source, fix works great. Test data and the original breaking production queries run fine for me. Thank you very much!
-joel
On May 9, 2013, at 6:19 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> jroller(at)rjobrien(dot)com writes:
>> We've come across a specific query and query plan that causes a repeatable
>> segmentation fault on the postgresql backend.
>
> Ah, I see it: gistrescan() is trying to preserve the per-scankey
> fn_extra values to allow caching, but what it's doing does not work
> if more than one scankey refers to the same consistentFn, ie, the
> same index column. A bit surprising we've not seen this before,
> because I think that code has been like that for awhile.
>
> Will fix, thanks for the report!
>
> regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Euler Taveira | 2013-05-10 22:17:31 | Re: Inconsistency between TO_CHAR() and TO_NUMBER() |
Previous Message | Thomas Kellerer | 2013-05-10 16:09:58 | Re: Inconsistency between TO_CHAR() and TO_NUMBER() |