Re: [HACKERS] an older problem? hash table out of memory
| От | Tom Lane |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: [HACKERS] an older problem? hash table out of memory |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 29625.925826650@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] an older problem? hash table out of memory (Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>) |
| Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] an older problem? hash table out of memory
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
>> The "hashtable out of memory" problem is reproducible, however.
>> I'm on it.
> Historically, no one knows much about the hash routines.
Well, I've been learning some unpleasant truths :-(. Hope to have
some fixes to commit in the next few days.
The immediate cause of one coredump I saw was that someone who was
overenthusiastically replacing sprintf's with snprintf's had written
snprintf(tempname, strlen(tempname), ...);
where tempname points to just-allocated, quite uninitialized
memory. Exercise for the student: how many different ways can
this go wrong? Unsettling question: how many other places did
that someone make the same mistake??
I don't have time for this right now, but it'd be a real good idea
to grep the source for strlen near snprintf to see if this same
problem appears anywhere else...
regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: