Re: Worth using personality(ADDR_NO_RANDOMIZE) for EXEC_BACKEND on linux?
| От | Tom Lane |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Worth using personality(ADDR_NO_RANDOMIZE) for EXEC_BACKEND on linux? |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 8115.1628805578@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение |
| Ответ на | Re: Worth using personality(ADDR_NO_RANDOMIZE) for EXEC_BACKEND on linux? (Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Worth using personality(ADDR_NO_RANDOMIZE) for EXEC_BACKEND on linux?
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com> writes:
> On Fri, Aug 13, 2021 at 3:13 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> I don't see why that approach couldn't be incorporated into pg_ctl,
>> or the postmaster itself. Given Andres' point that Linux ASLR
>> disable probably has to happen in pg_ctl, it seems like doing it
>> in pg_ctl in all cases is the way to move forward.
> I think doing it in the postmaster is best, since otherwise you have
> to put code into pg_regress.c and pg_ctl.c. Here's a patch like that.
Hmm, ok. Small thought: it might be better to put the #if inside
the "else { .... }". That way it scales easily to allow other
platform-specific defaults if we find anything useful. As-is,
the obvious extension would end up with multiple else-blocks,
which seems likely to confuse pgindent if nothing else.
regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: