[BUGS] 答复: [BUGS] 答复: [BUGS] BUG #14615: ReplicationOriginShmemInit Memory access cross-border

Hi Andres,

Yes, your solution is same with my.  I have attached the patch file in former email.

Sorry for my mistake for this code. This code is come from 9.5.3.  after that ,I create a patch file using 9.6.2.

The attachment is the email.

>if (!found)
>        {
>               int                 i;
>               MemSet(replication_states_ctl, 0, ReplicationOriginShmemSize());
>               replication_states_ctl->tranche_id = LWLockNewTrancheId();
>               replication_states_ctl->tranche.name = "ReplicationOrigins";
>               replication_states_ctl->tranche.array_base =
>                      &replication_states[0].lock;
>               replication_states_ctl->tranche.array_stride =
>                      sizeof(ReplicationState);
>
>               //MemSet(replication_states, 0, ReplicationOriginShmemSize());
>
>               for (i = 0; i < max_replication_slots; i++)
>                      LWLockInitialize(&replication_states[i].lock,
>                                                  replication_states_ctl->tranche_id);
>        }

Thanks

Bret

发送自 Windows 10 版邮件应用

On 2017-04-10 07:02:06 +0000, shao bret wrote:
> Hi Michael,
> Thanks for your quickly response!
> I think maybe you have a little misunderstanding with my solution.
>
> My solution is that
>       if (!found)
>        {
>               int                 i;
>               MemSet(replication_states_ctl, 0, ReplicationOriginShmemSize());
>               replication_states_ctl->tranche_id = LWLockNewTrancheId();
>               replication_states_ctl->tranche.name = "ReplicationOrigins";
>               replication_states_ctl->tranche.array_base =
>                      &replication_states[0].lock;
>               replication_states_ctl->tranche.array_stride =
>                      sizeof(ReplicationState);
>
>               //MemSet(replication_states, 0, ReplicationOriginShmemSize());
>
>               for (i = 0; i < max_replication_slots; i++)
>                      LWLockInitialize(&replication_states[i].lock,
>                                                  replication_states_ctl->tranche_id);
>        }
> So I think it’s easier for understanding code.
> What do you think?

That's imo just more work to maintain if additional fields added.

- Andres