Horton

Re: Snapshot synchronization, again...

Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>

View thread
From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
To: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>
Cc: Joachim Wieland <joe@mcknight.de>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>, Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2011-02-22T14:29:20Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 8:58 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
<heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> On 22.02.2011 15:52, Robert Haas wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 8:01 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
>> <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>  wrote:
>>>
>>> Yes. It would be good to perform those sanity checks anyway.
>>
>> I don't think it's good; I think it's absolutely necessary.  Otherwise
>> someone can generate arbitrary garbage, hash it, and feed it to us.
>> No?
>
> No, the hash is stored in shared memory. The hash of the garbage has to
> match.

Oh.  Well that's really silly.  At that point you might as well just
store the snapshot and an integer identifier in shared memory, right?

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company