Re: Clear padding in PgStat_HashKey keys

From: Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Clear padding in PgStat_HashKey keys
Date: 2024-11-04 10:07:37
Message-ID: Zyic6YpRG863J6aN@ip-10-97-1-34.eu-west-3.compute.internal
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

On Mon, Nov 04, 2024 at 06:49:04PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 04, 2024 at 08:52:04AM +0000, Bertrand Drouvot wrote:
> > Yeah, but not only the relfilenode ones. All kinds were affected as random data
> > was in the padding bytes for all of them.
>
> A quick test where I add some padding junk in PgStat_HashKey proves
> that you are right.

Thanks for the testing!

> I'm wondering if we should backpatch that,
> actually, down to where it has been introduced. We are unlikely going
> to change this structure,

Yeah.

> but if we do for the sake of a bug fix,
> which is always a possibility as ABI does not matter much for this
> internal structure, that's potentially trouble waiting ahead.

That's right.

> Thoughts?

hm, yeah I think that it could fall into the "low-risk fixes" category [0] and
that we can opt for backpatch.

[0]: https://www.postgresql.org/support/versioning/

Regards,

--
Bertrand Drouvot
PostgreSQL Contributors Team
RDS Open Source Databases
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Matthias van de Meent 2024-11-04 10:08:03 Re: protocol-level wait-for-LSN
Previous Message Bertrand Drouvot 2024-11-04 10:01:50 Re: per backend I/O statistics