Re: Stack overflow issue

From: mahendrakar s <mahendrakarforpg(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Richard Guo <guofenglinux(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Егор Чиндяскин <kyzevan23(at)mail(dot)ru>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Stack overflow issue
Date: 2022-08-24 12:59:02
Message-ID: CABkiuWpSXbRj=4Ds-fpouKz5aVP10zQu6pfB-s_8TH-4_TKxcw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi Richard,

Patch is looking good to me. Would request others to take a look at it as
well.

Thanks,
Mahendrakar.

On Wed, 24 Aug 2022 at 17:24, Richard Guo <guofenglinux(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

>
> On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 7:12 PM Richard Guo <guofenglinux(at)gmail(dot)com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 6:49 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2022-Aug-24, mahendrakar s wrote:
>>>
>>> > Hi,
>>> > Can we have a parameter to control the recursion depth in these cases
>>> to
>>> > avoid crashes?
>>>
>>> We already have one (max_stack_depth). The problem is lack of calling
>>> the control function in a few places.
>>
>>
>> Thanks Egor and Alexander for the work! I think we can just add
>> check_stack_depth checks in these cases.
>>
>
> Attached adds the checks in these places. But I'm not sure about the
> snowball case. Can we edit src/backend/snowball/libstemmer/*.c directly?
>
> Thanks
> Richard
>

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Natarajan R 2022-08-24 13:00:29 Re: Logical replication support for generic wal record
Previous Message Bharath Rupireddy 2022-08-24 12:30:16 Re: Logical replication support for generic wal record