Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> The underlined word is a field length word that evidently should contain
>> 8, but contains hex 8008. This causes the tuple-data decoder to step
>> way past the end of the tuple and off into never-never land.
> Hmm, perhaps we could protect against "impossible" length words?
Perhaps. I'm hesitant to add additional tests into the inner loop of
heap_deform_tuple and friends though. It's not like it's going to do
anything to recover your data post-corruption :-(
regards, tom lane