On 2021-Aug-06, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > On 8/5/21 11:29 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> > I was wondering if we should have postmaster do > > personality(ADDR_NO_RANDOMIZE) > > for EXEC_BACKEND builds? It seems nicer to make it automatically work than > > have people remember that they need to call "setarch --addr-no-randomize > > make check". How common is to get a failure? I know I've run tests under EXEC_BACKEND and not seen any failures. Not many runs though. > > Not that it actually matters for EXEC_BACKEND, but theoretically doing > > personality(ADDR_NO_RANDOMIZE) in postmaster is a tad more secure than doing > > it via setarch, as in the personality() case postmaster's layout itself is > > still randomized... True. I think the security aspect is not critically important, since hopefully nobody should be using such builds for production. > (Thinks: do we have non-Windows buildfarm members doing EXEC_BACKEND?) culicidae does that. -- Álvaro Herrera PostgreSQL Developer — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/ "Pido que me den el Nobel por razones humanitarias" (Nicanor Parra)
