Re: BUG #17855: Uninitialised memory used when the name type value processed in binary mode of Memoize
Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>
From: Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>
To: David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>
Cc: exclusion@gmail.com, pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org
Date: 2023-03-23T03:25:25Z
Lists: pgsql-bugs
On Wed, Mar 22, 2023 at 8:11 PM David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com> wrote: > A relevant comment is in StoreIndexTuple(): > > /* > * Note: we must use the tupdesc supplied by the AM in index_deform_tuple, > * not the slot's tupdesc, in case the latter has different datatypes > * (this happens for btree name_ops in particular). They'd better have > * the same number of columns though, as well as being datatype-compatible > * which is something we can't so easily check. > */ > > I'm just not really certain if we can say name is > "datatype-compatible" with cstring or not. It seems that namehash, > namecmp, nameout etc are all coded so that they can accept cstrings as > inputs. It's just not going to be safe for anything that wants to > access all of the NAMEDATALEN bytes. I doubt that there is a clear answer to that question. Have you seen the comments about the cstring/name_ops hack mentioning a SIGSEGV in btrescan()? Those were added around the time index-only scans first went in. -- Peter Geoghegan
Commits
-
Ensure we allocate NAMEDATALEN bytes for names in Index Only Scans
- e3f9dcabd6f2 12.19 landed
- 0a34bcd0c23e 13.15 landed
- e6b0efc65e58 14.12 landed
- 52f21f928732 15.7 landed
- 68d358545037 16.3 landed
- a63224be49b8 17.0 landed