From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
Subject: | PostmasterContext survives into parallel workers!? |
Date: | 2016-08-01 20:18:37 |
Message-ID: | 14111.1470082717@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
I noticed $subject while fooling around with the tqueue.c memory leak
issues. This does not seem like a good idea to me. At the very least,
it's a waste of space that could be used for something else, and at the
worst, it might be a security issue because it leaves security-sensitive
pg_hba and pg_ident information laying about in places where it might be
recoverable (if only through memory-disclosure bugs, which we've had
before and no doubt will have again).
The reason is that the parallel worker launch path contains no equivalent
of PostgresMain's stanza
if (PostmasterContext)
{
MemoryContextDelete(PostmasterContext);
PostmasterContext = NULL;
}
Now, I'm undecided whether to flush that context only in parallel workers,
or to try to make it go away for all bgworkers of any stripe. The latter
seems a little better from a security standpoint, but I wonder if anyone
has a use-case where that'd be a bad idea?
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2016-08-01 20:20:58 | Re: HandleParallelMessages contains CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS? |
Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2016-08-01 19:59:50 | Re: New version numbering practices |