Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Snapshot synchronization, again...

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: Joachim Wieland <joe(at)mcknight(dot)de>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Snapshot synchronization, again...
Date: 2011-02-22 14:29:20
Message-ID: AANLkTim0t=ro8pH010yrwMcNvdVO8yPw-XWRgz0qmfnq@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 8:58 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
<heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> On 22.02.2011 15:52, Robert Haas wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 8:01 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
>> <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)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

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Heikki LinnakangasDate: 2011-02-22 14:34:34
Subject: Re: Snapshot synchronization, again...
Previous:From: rsmoguraDate: 2011-02-22 14:22:56
Subject: Re: Void binary patch

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group