| From: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Anthonin Bonnefoy <anthonin(dot)bonnefoy(at)datadoghq(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Fix uninitialized xl_running_xacts padding |
| Date: | 2026-02-16 00:17:56 |
| Message-ID: | CA+hUKG++LE6P6g4n+-QPHBwAnvcVRyG1tUnzscUriWAFHc6s6Q@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Feb 13, 2026 at 10:39 PM Anthonin Bonnefoy
<anthonin(dot)bonnefoy(at)datadoghq(dot)com> wrote:
> The 3 bytes of padding after subxid_overflow were left uninitialized,
> leading to the random 'ca ce 9b' data being written in the WAL. The
> attached patch fixes the issue by zeroing the xl_running_xacts
> structure in LogCurrentRunningXacts using MemSet.
Nitpick: the so-called universal zero initialiser syntax (var = {0})
is a nicer way to do this and generally preferred in new code AFAIK.
But in this case, it seems we don't actually worry about initialising
WAL padding bytes in general. valgrind.supp has an entry to prevent
warnings about it. Should we?
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu) | 2026-02-16 00:47:55 | RE: Improve docs syntax checking and enable it in the meson build |
| Previous Message | Chao Li | 2026-02-15 23:39:09 | Re: Fix uninitialized xl_running_xacts padding |