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