Re: Snapshot synchronization, again...

From: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(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 13:58:05
Message-ID: 4D63C0ED.7070906@enterprisedb.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

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.

--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Merlin Moncure 2011-02-22 14:12:23 Re: Void binary patch
Previous Message Robert Haas 2011-02-22 13:52:34 Re: Snapshot synchronization, again...