Re: pgsql: Fix potential stack overflow in incremental backup.

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Thomas Munro <tmunro(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Cc: pgsql-committers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pgsql: Fix potential stack overflow in incremental backup.
Date: 2024-04-11 02:27:54
Message-ID: ZhdKqj5DwoOzirFv@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-committers

Hi Thomas,

On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 01:53:24AM +0000, Thomas Munro wrote:
> Fix potential stack overflow in incremental backup.
>
> The user can set RELSEG_SIZE to a high number at compile time, so we
> can't use it to control the size of an array on the stack: it could be
> many gigabytes in size. On closer inspection, we don't really need that
> intermediate array anyway. Let's just write directly into the output
> array, and then perform the absolute->relative adjustment in place.
> This fixes new code from commit dc212340058.

+ * file just as if this were not an incremental backup. The contents of the
+ * relative_block_numbers array is unspecified in this case.

Perhaps you mean s/is/are/ here? The contents are what's not
specified.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-committers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Thomas Munro 2024-04-11 02:38:28 pgsql: Fix grammar.
Previous Message Thomas Munro 2024-04-11 01:53:24 pgsql: Fix potential stack overflow in incremental backup.