Re: Potential ABI breakage in upcoming minor releases

Pavan Deolasee <pavan.deolasee@gmail.com>

From: Pavan Deolasee <pavan.deolasee@gmail.com>
To: Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander@timescale.com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Marco Slot <marco.slot@gmail.com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>, Christoph Berg <myon@debian.org>
Date: 2024-11-15T18:40:06Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →
  1. Undo unintentional ABI break in struct ResultRelInfo.

  2. For inplace update durability, make heap_update() callers wait.

  3. Fix btmarkpos/btrestrpos array key wraparound bug.

  4. Fix calculation of which GENERATED columns need to be updated.

On Fri, Nov 15, 2024 at 11:39 PM Pavan Deolasee <pavan.deolasee@gmail.com>
wrote:

>
> Looking more carefully at the usage of `ResultRelInfo` in the PGD code, I
> think we might also be impacted by it. At one place, we loop through the
> `es_result_relations` array and a size mismatch there will cause problems.
> Interestingly, in v14 and above, we read from `es_opened_result_relations`,
> which is a List, so it should be safe. I will try some tests on v13 to see
> if they result in crashes. But it seems quite likely by reading the code.
>
>
Ah, the addition of a member to `ResultRelInfo` did not happen in v12 and
v13, even though the commit was backpatched all the way to v12. Maybe we
(PGD) got twice lucky :-) There could be other extensions which might be
looping through `es_result_relations` though and get impacted.

Thanks,
Pavan