Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1ssO6o-0086TP-Jc for pgsql-bugs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Sun, 22 Sep 2024 15:02:47 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1ssO6l-007LC3-ST for pgsql-bugs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Sun, 22 Sep 2024 15:02:43 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:3e1:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1ssO6l-007L9L-K5 for pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org; Sun, 22 Sep 2024 15:02:43 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([68.162.161.243]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1ssO6i-000V3J-V1 for pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org; Sun, 22 Sep 2024 15:02:42 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 48MF2eOi2878481; Sun, 22 Sep 2024 11:02:40 -0400 From: Tom Lane To: Craig Milhiser cc: pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org Subject: Re: Reference to - BUG #18349: ERROR: invalid DSA memory alloc request size 1811939328, CONTEXT: parallel worker In-reply-to: References: Comments: In-reply-to Craig Milhiser message dated "Sun, 22 Sep 2024 07:58:41 -0400" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <2878479.1727017360.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2024 11:02:40 -0400 Message-ID: <2878480.1727017360@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Archived-At: Precedence: bulk Craig Milhiser writes: > Has the referenced bug in this discussion[1] been released? I don't see any indication, either in that thread or in the commit log, that anything has been done in this area since about 16.2. It's not an easy problem in general. Having said that, Aurora is not Postgres, and I don't know how closely they track us. Can you reproduce this problem on a stock build of community Postgres? regards, tom lane