Re: BUG #16129: Segfault in tts_virtual_materialize in logical replication worker

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Ondřej Jirman <ienieghapheoghaiwida(at)xff(dot)cz>, pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: BUG #16129: Segfault in tts_virtual_materialize in logical replication worker
Date: 2019-11-21 23:56:47
Message-ID: 14166.1574380607@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs

Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 05:37:25PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> I don't think that's quite true. After the ExecCopySlot call, the
> pass-by-ref Datums in remoteslot will point to a tuple attached to
> localslot. But it does not pass the tuple 'ownership' to the remoteslot,
> i.e. the flag TTS_FLAG_SHOULDFREE won't be set, i.e. the tuple won't be
> freed.

Nope:

static void
tts_heap_copyslot(TupleTableSlot *dstslot, TupleTableSlot *srcslot)
{
HeapTuple tuple;
MemoryContext oldcontext;

oldcontext = MemoryContextSwitchTo(dstslot->tts_mcxt);
tuple = ExecCopySlotHeapTuple(srcslot);
MemoryContextSwitchTo(oldcontext);

ExecStoreHeapTuple(tuple, dstslot, true);
}

"remoteslot" will contain its very own copy of the data, which
is then summarily freed by ExecClearSlot.

>> I imagine the only reason this code has gotten past the valgrind
>> animals is that we're not testing cases where non-replaced columns
>> in the subscriber table are of pass-by-ref types.

> I haven't checked, but I'd imagine we actually do such tests. I've
> however tried to reproduce this, unsuccessfully.

I did check, and we don't. See patch.

It's possible that the OP is seeing some different problem,
but I can definitely demonstrate that there is a problem
that this change fixes.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tomas Vondra 2019-11-22 00:11:10 Re: BUG #16129: Segfault in tts_virtual_materialize in logical replication worker
Previous Message Tomas Vondra 2019-11-21 23:47:01 Re: BUG #16129: Segfault in tts_virtual_materialize in logical replication worker