Re: BUG #17619: AllocSizeIsValid violation in parallel hash join

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Peter Geoghegan
Тема Re: BUG #17619: AllocSizeIsValid violation in parallel hash join
Дата
Msg-id CAH2-Wz=Uj=AyZ8Zcz_qoji1HeBrni+M24xTP8RtD12109pw4OQ@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: BUG #17619: AllocSizeIsValid violation in parallel hash join  (Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>)
Список pgsql-bugs
On Tue, Sep 27, 2022 at 9:40 AM Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie> wrote:
> I'm not completely sure, but I think that the explanation might just
> be that the memory is likely to be "zero initialized" in practice.
> Even when it isn't we're still only talking about instrumentation
> counters that start out with garbage values -- so nothing truly
> critical.

Actually, it looks like we'll always have each worker zero-initialize
their space for buffer stats and WAL stats in InstrEndParallelQuery(),
which is also called by nbtsort.c and by parallel VACUUM. So as it
turns out there is no issue with uninitialized memory here.

I don't think that that changes all that much. It still seems like a
good idea to do all required zero initialization in the leader, up
front. We're talking about very small structures here, so there is no
reason to not have a uniform, centralized approach in
ParallelQueryMain(). We actually zero initialized the dead_items array
for PARALLEL_VACUUM_KEY_DEAD_ITEMS, which is probably unnecessary and
has non-trivial overhead, but we don't zero initialize relatively tiny
WAL and buffer instrumentation counters nearby.

-- 
Peter Geoghegan



В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Peter Geoghegan
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: BUG #17619: AllocSizeIsValid violation in parallel hash join
Следующее
От: Peter Geoghegan
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: BUG #17619: AllocSizeIsValid violation in parallel hash join