| From: | "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Gavin Sherry <swm(at)linuxworld(dot)com(dot)au>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: slru.c race condition (was Re: TRAP: FailedAssertion("!((itemid)->lp_flags |
| Date: | 2005-10-31 19:30:32 |
| Message-ID: | 20051031193032.GL20349@pervasive.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
On Mon, Oct 31, 2005 at 01:34:17PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> There is no way if the system has some incorrect value whether that
> would later corrupt the data or not. Anything the system does that it
> shouldn't do is a potential corruption problem.
But is it safe to say that there are areas where a failed assert is far
more likely to result in data corruption? And that there's also areas
where there's likely to be difficult/impossible to find bugs, such as
race conditions? ISTM that it would be valuable to do some additional
checking in these critical areas.
--
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com
Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117
vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-10-31 20:42:06 | Re: 8.1 Release Candidate 1 Coming ... |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-10-31 19:19:46 | Re: slru.c race condition (was Re: [HACKERS] TRAP: FailedAssertion("!((itemid)->lp_flags & 0x01)", ) |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Gregory Maxwell | 2005-10-31 20:46:15 | Re: slru.c race condition (was Re: TRAP: FailedAssertion("!((itemid)->lp_flags |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-10-31 19:19:46 | Re: slru.c race condition (was Re: [HACKERS] TRAP: FailedAssertion("!((itemid)->lp_flags & 0x01)", ) |