| From: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Potential stack overflow in incremental base backup |
| Date: | 2024-04-10 10:21:04 |
| Message-ID: | CA+hUKGLHmsi_00Ck3RS92o5X_W9Lxnmx7AAdBwh_kMTxEAFYGw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Mar 8, 2024 at 6:53 AM Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> ... We could
> avoid transposing relative block numbers to absolute block numbers
> whenever start_blkno is 0, ...
Could we just write the blocks directly into the output array, and
then transpose them directly in place if start_blkno > 0? See
attached. I may be missing something, but the only downside I can
think of is that the output array is still clobbered even if we decide
to return BACK_UP_FILE_FULLY because of the 90% rule, but that just
requires a warning in the comment at the top.
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| v2-0001-Fix-potential-stack-overflow-in-incremental-baseb.patch | application/octet-stream | 3.4 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2024-04-10 10:35:52 | Re: Add new protocol message to change GUCs for usage with future protocol-only GUCs |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2024-04-10 10:12:52 | Re: Transparent column encryption |