Re: BUG #8143: Backend segmentation fault in pg_trgm

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

In response to

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  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()