Horton

Re: BUG #17995: Segmentation fault caused by UPDATE statement

Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Alexander Lakhin <exclusion@gmail.com>, zuming.jiang@inf.ethz.ch, pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org
Date: 2023-06-26T04:56:42Z
Lists: pgsql-bugs 
On Mon, Jun 26, 2023 at 12:27:08AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> writes:
>> Thanks for the pointer, I'll double-check that.  Some of the locations
>> of stack depth checks proposed involve performance-sensitive code
>> paths, though, like mcxt.c :/
> 
> I hadn't looked at the patch yet, but ... mcxt.c?  How is that recursive?
> Even if there is some path that recurses through that, wouldn't the
> check be better placed in a less-hot part of the loop?

Yeah, that's my impression.  I'll switch to the other thread after
looking more in details.
--
Michael

Commits

  1. Check for interrupts and stack overflow in TParserGet().

  2. Doc: Clarify the behavior of triggers/rules in a logical subscriber.