Re: Avoid a possible overflow (src/backend/utils/sort/logtape.c)
Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
From: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
To: Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>
Cc: Ranier Vilela <ranier.vf@gmail.com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2023-08-25T01:18:48Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 05:33:15PM -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > I am in favor of fixing the problem. I don't quite recall what it was > that made the discussion stall last time around. I think that you mean this one: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAH2-WznCscXnWmnj=STC0aSa7QG+BRedDnZsP=Jo_R9GUZvUrg@mail.gmail.com Still that looks entirely different to me. Here we have a problem where the number of free blocks stored may cause an overflow in the internal routine retrieving a free block, but your other thread is about long being not enough on Windows. I surely agree that there's an argument for improving this interface and remove its use of long in the long-term but that would not be backpatched. I also don't see why we cannot do the change proposed here until then, and it's backpatchable. There is a second thread related to logtape.c here, but that's still different: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/CAH2-Wzn5PCBLUrrds%3DhD439LtWP%2BPD7ekRTd%3D8LdtqJ%2BKO5D1Q%40mail.gmail.com -- Michael
Commits
-
Avoid possible overflow with ltsGetFreeBlock() in logtape.c
- 420c8dc7ec67 13.13 landed
- d2bd4ba30585 14.10 landed
- 5180160c1774 15.5 landed
- 1d2939b6dc63 16.0 landed
- 52c6c0f19693 17.0 landed