| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-bugs" <pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Hans van Kranenburg <hans(dot)van(dot)kranenburg(at)mendix(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: BUG #5566: High levels of savepoint nesting trigger stack overflow in AssignTransactionId |
| Date: | 2010-07-19 17:58:30 |
| Message-ID: | 201007191958.31373.andres@anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
Hi,
On Monday 19 July 2010 19:57:13 Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Excerpts from Andres Freund's message of lun jul 19 11:58:06 -0400 2010:
> > On Monday 19 July 2010 17:26:25 Hans van Kranenburg wrote:
> > > When issuing an update statement in a transaction with ~30800 levels of
> > > savepoint nesting, (which is insane, but possible), postgresql
> > > segfaults due to a stack overflow in the AssignTransactionId function,
> > > which recursively assign transaction ids to parent transactions.
> >
> > It seems easy enough to throw a check_stack_depth() in there - survives
> > make check here.
>
> I wonder if it would work to deal with the problem non-recursively
> instead. We don't impose subxact depth restrictions elsewhere, why
> start now?
It looks trivial enough, but whats the point?
Andres
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2010-07-19 18:19:35 | Re: BUG #5566: High levels of savepoint nesting trigger stack overflow in AssignTransactionId |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2010-07-19 17:57:13 | Re: BUG #5566: High levels of savepoint nesting trigger stack overflow in AssignTransactionId |