| From: | Jelte Fennema-Nio <postgres(at)jeltef(dot)nl> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>, Melih Mutlu <m(dot)melihmutlu(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ranier Vilela <ranier(dot)vf(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Flushing large data immediately in pqcomm |
| Date: | 2024-04-07 10:04:48 |
| Message-ID: | CAGECzQQUNpu2NQB01FLEVnxPeYBY1V5eG24z11BTMz9R6J5nyQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, 7 Apr 2024 at 03:39, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> Changing the global vars to size_t seems mildly bogus to me. All it's
> achieving is to use slightly more memory. It also just seems unrelated to the
> change.
I took a closer look at this. I agree that changing PqSendBufferSize
to size_t is unnecessary: given the locations that it is used I see no
risk of overflow anywhere. Changing the type of PqSendPointer and
PqSendStart is needed though, because (as described by Heiki and David
upthread) the argument type of internal_flush_buffer is size_t*. So if
you actually pass int* there, and the sizes are not the same then you
will start writing out of bounds. And because internal_flush_buffer is
introduced in this patch, it is related to this change.
This is what David just committed too.
However, the "required" var actually should be of size_t to avoid
overflow if len is larger than int even without this change. So
attached is a tiny patch that does that.
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| v7-0001-Avoid-possible-overflow-in-socket_putmessage_nonb.patch | application/octet-stream | 1009 bytes |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | John Naylor | 2024-04-07 10:05:36 | Re: Add bump memory context type and use it for tuplesorts |
| Previous Message | John Naylor | 2024-04-07 09:44:56 | Re: [PoC] Improve dead tuple storage for lazy vacuum |