| From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
|---|---|
| To: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andrey Borodin <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru>, Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, Darafei Komяpa Praliaskouski <me(at)komzpa(dot)net>, Pavel Borisov <pashkin(dot)elfe(at)gmail(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Alexander Korotkov <a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Yet another fast GiST build |
| Date: | 2021-01-17 23:04:36 |
| Message-ID: | CAH2-WzkB8z5wGvhZrzcF=MLFGpk-whmfic8sdDJANY4HfUki-w@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Jan 17, 2021 at 2:52 PM Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> wrote:
> I'm not sure I understand. It's true that the raw page image can contain
> data from a different index, or any garbage really. And the function
> will behave badly if you do that. That's an accepted risk with
> pageinspect functions, that's why they're superuser-only, although some
> of them are more tolerant of corrupt pages than others. The
> gist_page_items_bytea() variant doesn't try to parse the key data and is
> less likely to crash on bad input.
I personally agree with you - it's not like there aren't other ways
for superusers to crash the server (most of which seem very similar to
this gist_page_items() issue, in fact). I just think that it's worth
being clear about that being a trade-off that we've accepted.
--
Peter Geoghegan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2021-01-17 23:10:43 | Re: Yet another fast GiST build |
| Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2021-01-17 22:52:12 | Re: Yet another fast GiST build |