Re: segmentation fault in execTuples.c#ExecStoreVirtualTuple

From: Manuel Kniep <manuel(at)adjust(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: segmentation fault in execTuples.c#ExecStoreVirtualTuple
Date: 2015-01-16 12:21:28
Message-ID: etPan.54b90248.2eb141f2.10d@Manuels-MacBook-Air-5.local
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 16. Januar 2015 at 00:57:14, Tom Lane (tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us) wrote:
> I wrote:
> > Manuel Kniep writes:
> >> ok after lot’s of testing I could create a test case
> >> which can be found here https://gist.github.com/rapimo/3c8c1b35270e5854c524
> >> it’s written in ruby an depends on the gem activerecord pg and parallel
>
> > Hm. I don't see a segfault from this. I do see the CREATE TEMP TABLE
> > command failing with "ctid is NULL", which probably shouldn't be happening
> > ... but no segfault.
>
> The reason turns out to be that this is a dangling-pointer bug, and I was
> using a memory-clobber-enabled build so it was pretty predictable what the
> pointer would be pointing at. I've got no doubt that hard-to-reproduce
> misbehavior, including segfaults, would ensue without CLOBBER_FREED_MEMORY
> turned on.
>
> You need this patch:
> http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=patch;h=34668c8eca065d745bf1166a92c9efc588e7aee2

thanks a lot 
we applied the patch to our servers and everything looks great so far

cheers Manuel

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2015-01-16 12:26:40 Re: 9.5: Better memory accounting, towards memory-bounded HashAgg
Previous Message Andres Freund 2015-01-16 11:39:17 Re: Escaping from blocked send() reprised.