From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: report expected contrecord size |
Date: | 2020-09-03 22:33:08 |
Message-ID: | 20200903223308.GA25785@alvherre.pgsql |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2020-Sep-03, Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> > Well, the intention there is to cast the first operand (which is uint32)
> > so that it turns into signed 64-bits; the subtraction then occurs in 64
> > bit arithmetic normally. If I let the subtraction occur in 32-bit width
> > unsigned, the result might overflow 32 bits.
>
> Uh ... is it really possible for gotlen to be more than total_len?
> (I've not looked at the surrounding code here, but that seems weird.)
Well, as I understand, total_len comes from one page, and gotlen comes
from the continuation record(s) in the next page(s) of WAL. So if
things are messed up, it could happen. (This *is* the code that
validates the record, so it can't make too many assumptions.)
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2020-09-03 22:42:02 | Re: report expected contrecord size |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2020-09-03 22:17:30 | Re: report expected contrecord size |