Re: An oversight in ExecInitAgg for grouping sets

From: David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Richard Guo <guofenglinux(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: An oversight in ExecInitAgg for grouping sets
Date: 2023-01-04 22:17:48
Message-ID: CAApHDvqOnG67BS8SuqT55MvfNmZicc1_aPfBk+Nr-Sw5WcPLWA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, 3 Jan 2023 at 10:25, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> The thing that I find really distressing here is that it's been
> like this for years and none of our automated testing caught it.
> You'd have expected valgrind testing to do so ... but it does not,
> because we've never marked that word NOACCESS. Maybe we should
> rethink that? It'd require making mcxt.c do some valgrind flag
> manipulations so it could access the hdrmask when appropriate.

Yeah, that probably could have been improved during the recent change.
Here's a patch for it.

I'm just doing a final Valgrind run on it now to check for errors.

David

Attachment Content-Type Size
valgrind_MemoryChunk.patch text/plain 15.7 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Gilles Darold 2023-01-04 22:27:05 Re: fix and document CLUSTER privileges
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2023-01-04 22:17:30 Re: meson oddities