From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, Piotr Stefaniak <postgres(at)piotr-stefaniak(dot)me>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Aleksander Alekseev <a(dot)alekseev(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Chapman Flack <chap(at)anastigmatix(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Re: PROPOSAL: make PostgreSQL sanitizers-friendly (and prevent information disclosure) |
Date: | 2016-08-22 17:49:47 |
Message-ID: | CA+Tgmoa=YULkuGiZX+Pw0B-XUCK9bMc9+1U=Jv8V2uArgKKdSw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 1:46 PM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> I don't think the runtime overhead is likely to be all that high - if
> you look at valgrind.supp the peformancecritical parts basically are:
> - pgstat_send - the context switching is going to drown out some zeroing
> - xlog insertions - making the crc computation more predictable would
> actually be nice
> - reorderbuffer serialization - zeroing won't be a material part of the
> cost
>
> The rest is mostly bootstrap or python related.
>
> There might be cases where we *don't* unconditionally do the zeroing -
> e.g. I'm doubtful about the sinval stuff where we currently only
> conditionally clear - but the stuff in valgrind.supp seems fine.
Naturally you'll be wanting to conclusively demonstrate this with
benchmarks on multiple workloads, platforms, and concurrency levels.
Right? :-)
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andres Freund | 2016-08-22 17:52:32 | Re: Re: PROPOSAL: make PostgreSQL sanitizers-friendly (and prevent information disclosure) |
Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2016-08-22 17:47:34 | Re: Proposal for CSN based snapshots |