| From: | Ranier Vilela <ranier(dot)vf(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander(at)timescale(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(at)vondra(dot)me> |
| Subject: | Re: Avoid possible dereference null pointer (src/backend/utils/cache/relcache.c) |
| Date: | 2025-06-17 14:16:51 |
| Message-ID: | CAEudQAr4Eevx6BO-xmyAVoxGsVyCoqENPqc1Hg_LguxPMdKwtw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Em ter., 17 de jun. de 2025 às 11:10, Aleksander Alekseev <
aleksander(at)timescale(dot)com> escreveu:
> Hi Ranier,
>
> > To me this is a contradiction, whether you consider waiting for a
> segfault or consider adding an Assert.
> > For the user it is better to have a log, where he can quickly find the
> problem, rather than having to investigate on his own.
>
> That's the point. User's shouldn't encounter this.
It shouldn't.
> Thus there is no
> reason to break branch prediction for everyone here.
>
For now there is no consensus that there will not be a segfault.
If a segfault will never occur, ok.
IMO, this is not a query-dependent issue.
But the table in question is never corrupted or invalid.
best regards,
Ranier Vilela
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2025-06-17 14:17:27 | Re: Add progressive backoff to XactLockTableWait functions |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2025-06-17 14:15:37 | Re: Non-reproducible AIO failure |