Re: [BUG] Fix DETACH with FK pointing to a partitioned table fails

From: Tender Wang <tndrwang(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
Cc: Alexander Lakhin <exclusion(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais <jgdr(at)dalibo(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info>
Subject: Re: [BUG] Fix DETACH with FK pointing to a partitioned table fails
Date: 2024-10-25 09:06:38
Message-ID: CAHewXN=sHjKSCzvg2AZu=XjMRxjKKG8Mdw7v434xkNtxc05PSA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> 于2024年10月25日周五 16:30写道:

> On 2024-Oct-25, Tender Wang wrote:
>
> > Thanks for reporting. I can reproduce this memory invalid access on HEAD.
> > After debuging codes, I found the root cause.
> > In DetachPartitionFinalize(), below code:
> > att = TupleDescAttr(RelationGetDescr(partRel),
> > attmap->attnums[conkey[i] - 1] - 1);
> >
> > We should use confkey[i] -1 not conkey[i] - 1;
>
> Wow, how embarrasing, now that's one _really_ stupid bug and it's
> totally my own. Thanks for the analysis! I'll get this patched soon.
>
>
Hi,

When I debug codes, I find that the way to access AttrMap almost uses
"attrmp_ptr->attnums[offset]."
The codes now usually don't check if the offset is out of bounds, which
seems unsafe.
Can we wrap an access function? For example:
inline AttrNumber(attrmap_ptr, offset)
{
Assert(offset >= 0 && offset < attrmap_ptr->maplen);
return attrmap_ptr->attnums[offset];
}
Or a Macro.

I'm not sure if it's worth doing this.

--
Thanks,
Tender Wang

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alexander Korotkov 2024-10-25 09:48:49 Re: type cache cleanup improvements
Previous Message Nisha Moond 2024-10-25 08:51:07 Re: Conflict detection for update_deleted in logical replication