From: | Steve Lau <stevelauc(at)outlook(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Replace remaining getpwuid() calls with getpwuid_r()? |
Date: | 2025-07-10 05:10:26 |
Message-ID: | 24EDD099-AAD5-4173-8AB0-CC00E44802B9@outlook.com |
Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi hackers, when reading the source code, I noticed that Postgres is still using getpwuid(), which is not thread-safe since it returns a pointer to the static memory that can be overwritten by concurrent calls. Then I searched "getpwuid" in the mailing list[1], and there was a committed patch that refactored one such usage. So maybe we can clean up the remaining getpwuid() calls?
Then I realized that Postgres does not use threads but processes, so technically IMHO getpwuid() is safe to Postgres? But that patch mentioned that[2]:
> This is AFAICT the only call in the getpw*() family that needs to be dealt with. (There is also a getgrnam() call, but that is called very > early in the postmaster, before multiprocessing, so we can leave that as is.)
Which indeed confuses me. So my questions are:
1. Will the thread-safety issue of getpwuid() affect Postgres? Why?
2. If the answer to the first question is yes, should we clean up the remaining getpwuid() calls or not?
[1]: https://www.postgresql.org/search/?m=1&ln=pgsql-hackers&q=getpwuid
[2]: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/5f293da9-ceb4-4937-8e52-82c25db8e4d3@eisentraut.org
Best regards,
Steve.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Yugo Nagata | 2025-07-10 05:11:29 | Re: Extend ALTER DEFAULT PRIVILEGES for large objects |
Previous Message | Dilip Kumar | 2025-07-10 05:04:28 | Re: CHECKPOINT unlogged data |