> On Nov 5, 2021, at 8:56 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Some of the buildfarm is unimpressed with this --- looks like the test
> output is less stable than you thought.
Yes, it does. I had to play with it a bit to be sure the test itself is
faulty, and I believe that it is.
—
Mark Dilger
Enterpr
Robert Haas writes:
> OK, I've committed this version.
Some of the buildfarm is unimpressed with this --- looks like the test
output is less stable than you thought.
regards, tom lane
On Thu, Nov 4, 2021 at 6:58 PM Mark Dilger wrote:
> It only takes about 20 additional lines in the regression test to check the
> code paths for raw sizes which are too large and too small, so I've done that
> in this next version. Testing corrupt compressed data in a deterministic,
> cross pl
> On Nov 4, 2021, at 7:53 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>
> But, is it plausible to add test coverage for the new checks, or is
> that going to be too much of a pain?
It only takes about 20 additional lines in the regression test to check the
code paths for raw sizes which are too large and too smal
On Wed, Nov 3, 2021 at 6:56 PM Mark Dilger wrote:
> Done that way.
I agree with what others have said: this looks fine.
But, is it plausible to add test coverage for the new checks, or is
that going to be too much of a pain?
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
> On Oct 20, 2021, at 12:06 PM, Mark Dilger
> wrote:
>
> Ok. How about:
Done that way.
v3-0001-Adding-more-toast-pointer-checks-to-amcheck.patch
Description: Binary data
—
Mark Dilger
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
> On Oct 20, 2021, at 11:42 AM, Greg Stark wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed., Oct. 20, 2021, 12:41 Mark Dilger,
> wrote:
>
> I used a switch statement to trigger a compiler warning in such an event.
>
> Catching better compiler diagnostics is an excellent reason to choose this
> structure. I guess
On Wed., Oct. 20, 2021, 12:41 Mark Dilger,
wrote:
>
> I used a switch statement to trigger a compiler warning in such an event.
>
Catching better compiler diagnostics is an excellent reason to choose this
structure. I guess all I could ask is that the comment saying no default
branch say this is
> On Oct 19, 2021, at 1:58 PM, Greg Stark wrote:
>
> Right so here's a review.
>
> I think the patch is committable as is. It's an improvement and it
> does the job as promised. I do have some comments but I don't think
> they're serious issues and would actually be pretty happy committing
>
Right so here's a review.
I think the patch is committable as is. It's an improvement and it
does the job as promised. I do have some comments but I don't think
they're serious issues and would actually be pretty happy committing
it as is. Fwiw I didn't realize how short the patch was at first and
> On Jul 14, 2021, at 7:57 AM, Mark Dilger wrote:
>
> so no valid toast pointer should contain a va_rawsize field greater than
> MaxAllocSize
... nor should any valid toast pointer contain a va_extinfo field encoding a
va_extsize greater than va_rawsize - VARHDRSZ.
Violations of either of
> On Jul 14, 2021, at 3:33 AM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>
>> +/* The largest valid toast va_rawsize */
>> +#define VARLENA_SIZE_LIMIT 0x3FFF
>> +
>
> Hmm, a toasted datum cannot be larger than MaxAllocSize, because it's
> reconstituted in a palloc'd datum, right?
No datum size exceeds
@@ -30,6 +30,9 @@ PG_FUNCTION_INFO_V1(verify_heapam);
/* The number of columns in tuples returned by verify_heapam */
#define HEAPCHECK_RELATION_COLS 4
+/* The largest valid toast va_rawsize */
+#define VARLENA_SIZE_LIMIT 0x3FFF
+
Hmm, a toasted datum cannot be larger than MaxAllocSize,
Hi hackers,
> make installcheck-world: tested, failed
> Implements feature: tested, failed
> Spec compliant: tested, failed
> Documentation:tested, failed
Very sorry about these "failed" checkboxes. Didn't use the commitfest
webapp for a while. The patch is fine.
> T
The following review has been posted through the commitfest application:
make installcheck-world: tested, failed
Implements feature: tested, failed
Spec compliant: tested, failed
Documentation:tested, failed
This patch looks good to me. Considering a positive response
> On May 4, 2021, at 9:43 AM, Justin Pryzby wrote:
>
> + /* Oversized toasted attributes should never be stored */
> + if (toast_pointer.va_rawsize > VARLENA_SIZE_LIMIT)
> + report_corruption(ctx,
> + psprintf("toast valu
+ /* Oversized toasted attributes should never be stored */
+ if (toast_pointer.va_rawsize > VARLENA_SIZE_LIMIT)
+ report_corruption(ctx,
+ psprintf("toast value %u
rawsize %u exceeds limit %u",
+
Hackers,
During the version 14 development period, a few checks of toasted attributes
were written but never committed. For the version 15 development cycle, I'd
like to consider extending the checks of toasted attributes. First, no toasted
attribute should ever have a rawsize larger than the
18 matches
Mail list logo
