Hi Nathan,
Thank you for submitting this patch.
Best regards,
Jianghua
Nathan Bossart 于2025年6月27日周五 11:44写道：
> Committed.
>
> --
> nathan
>
Committed.
--
nathan
Nathan Bossart writes:
> On Thu, Jun 26, 2025 at 01:46:10PM -0700, Jianghua Yang wrote:
>> These errors trace back to failures in `dsm_attach()`, where the
>> segment handle value was incorrectly interpreted due to sign extension
>> from `int32`.
> I think there might be something else going on.
On Thu, Jun 26, 2025 at 01:46:10PM -0700, Jianghua Yang wrote:
> Just to follow up - in our production system (pg_cron extension),
> we´ve encountered real issues caused by passing a `Datum` to
> `dsm_attach()` using `DatumGetInt32()` instead of `DatumGetUInt32()`.
>
> Here's a sample of the error
Hi,
Just to follow up — in our production system (pg_cron extension),
we’ve encountered real issues caused by passing a `Datum` to
`dsm_attach()` using `DatumGetInt32()` instead of `DatumGetUInt32()`.
Here's a sample of the errors observed in our logs:
ERROR: unable to map dynamic shared memory
On Thu, Jun 26, 2025 at 12:51:10PM -0700, Jianghua Yang wrote:
> The argument passed to `dsm_attach()` is expected to be a `uint32`, but the
> code currently uses `DatumGetInt32()` to extract it from the `Datum`
> argument. This can lead to incorrect behavior when the high bit is set, as
> 'unable
Hi,
The attached patch fixes a minor type mismatch in `test_shm_mq_main()`.
The argument passed to `dsm_attach()` is expected to be a `uint32`, but the
code currently uses `DatumGetInt32()` to extract it from the `Datum`
argument. This can lead to incorrect behavior when the high bit is set, as
'
