pg.ddx.io  pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org mailing list archive  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Alexander Lakhin <exclusion@gmail.com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org, Richard Guo <guofenglinux@gmail.com>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>
Subject: Re: BUG #17798: Incorrect memory access occurs when using BEFORE ROW UPDATE trigger
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2024 20:00:01 +0300
Message-ID: <17124cd9-6515-2076-6eac-40d44388f833@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+TgmoYcYwBxV7J_Us=zz7Wchbg1+M6jPdbogZFYZD1WmZB9ZQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <17798-0907404928dcf0dd@postgresql.org>
	<87fe6c28-80b2-f709-a8db-d105e5240e39@gmail.com>
	<CAMbWs4_pg7ab=OJF2CGLzs=noWEjujerxfo92sm3RL9ce=ogsQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAMbWs48FHhuuuWbxygO4Wey7ahdaSwRjzJODKXx7=GFsge_aLg@mail.gmail.com>
	<f5ff446f-72e2-44f7-80c6-4256cf7caeb3@gmail.com>
	<a4a8cf37-e9d5-3c58-fc2e-d217cf66f315@gmail.com>
	<1849610.1682807087@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<e989408c-1838-61cd-c968-1fcf47c6fbba@gmail.com>
	<CA+TgmoZz1fGaTnOSf1yQhwYovEEkJZ9iioQXnLgaJz+1fBip=g@mail.gmail.com>
	<494cd7c4-c109-6886-c0e3-138a95e7e38b@gmail.com>
	<CA+TgmoYAsQWMqMUNNdyp8V0KVxMoz=0y+3XNCf3ST-o1yyz5Jg@mail.gmail.com>
	<74335d44-819d-60e0-859a-efe74d9c84c2@gmail.com>
	<CA+TgmoYkOp=jDg15ugJDwxqoA6drAPBZmOJkhZJ11HZWhEYx6w@mail.gmail.com>
	<b64c183f-4ae1-0b16-afcf-11101ebc4213@gmail.com>
	<CA+TgmobRr7iWYNNj+-djD6AkoS5trpL8JznXbfO74+dtmCsOsg@mail.gmail.com>
	<325298.1705009396@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<94ca869c-472b-f1cf-3d7c-aa8530f5475d@gmail.com>
	<CA+TgmoYcYwBxV7J_Us=zz7Wchbg1+M6jPdbogZFYZD1WmZB9ZQ@mail.gmail.com>

12.01.2024 17:56, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 12, 2024 at 8:00 AM Alexander Lakhin <exclusion@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I had decided to move that step out of "if (epqslot_candidate != NULL)"
>> in v3 to play safe when removing ExecMaterializeSlot(newslot) brought by
>> 75e03eabe (more details upthread [1]). I thought that if that commit stated
>> that the slot needs materialization (it was time before 86dc90056, which
>> raised the current issue), then the materialization must be preserved.
>> (The same commit can be found in zheap repository [2], but I found no other
>> explanation of it's purpose...)
>> Though looking at the current core code, I'm inclined to perform
>> ExecMaterializeSlot() only when we have epqslot_candidate, if we can afford
>> not to bother about that zheap-specific or similar scenario...
> I don't understand why it's ever safe to skip ExecMaterializeSlot
> here. IIUC, if we have no EPQ slot, newslot is still not materialized
> and thus dependent on oldslot ... and we're about to
> ExecFetchSlotHeapTuple on oldslot.

To my understanding, when we have no epqslot_candidate, it means that
newslot came from ExecBRUpdateTriggers's callers and it can't be dependent
on an internal oldslot's buffer.
For example, ExecModifyTable() does the following:
             slot = ExecGetUpdateNewTuple(resultRelInfo, context.planSlot,
                                             oldSlot);
             context.relaction = NULL;

             /* Now apply the update. */
             slot = ExecUpdate(&context, resultRelInfo, tupleid, oldtuple,
                                 slot, node->canSetTag);

Thus, newslot (aka slot here) depends on oldSlot inside ExecModifyTable(),
but not on oldslot inside ExecBRUpdateTriggers(), so
ExecFetchSlotHeapTuple(oldslot,...) can't affect it. Though then we still
have the question regarding zheap open -- can some external code introduce
new implicit dependencies?

Best regards,
Alexander





view thread (37+ messages)  latest in thread

Message-ID: <17124cd9-6515-2076-6eac-40d44388f833@gmail.com>
Permalink:  ../17124cd9-6515-2076-6eac-40d44388f833@gmail.com/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/17124cd9-6515-2076-6eac-40d44388f833@gmail.com

 · 

reply
Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org
  Cc: exclusion@gmail.com, robertmhaas@gmail.com, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, guofenglinux@gmail.com, andres@anarazel.de, pg@bowt.ie
  Subject: Re: BUG #17798: Incorrect memory access occurs when using BEFORE ROW UPDATE trigger
  In-Reply-To: <17124cd9-6515-2076-6eac-40d44388f833@gmail.com>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox