Fix dereference of dangling pointer in GiST index buffering build.#383
Merged
reshke merged 1 commit intoOPENGPDB_STABLEfrom May 7, 2026
Merged
Fix dereference of dangling pointer in GiST index buffering build.#383reshke merged 1 commit intoOPENGPDB_STABLEfrom
reshke merged 1 commit intoOPENGPDB_STABLEfrom
Conversation
gistBuildCallback tried to fetch the size of an index tuple that might have already been freed by gistProcessEmptyingQueue. While this seems to usually be harmless in production builds, in principle it could result in a SIGSEGV, or more likely a bogus value for indtuplesSize leading to poor page-split decisions later in the build. The memory management here is confusing and could stand to be refactored, but for the moment it seems to be enough to fetch the tuple size sooner. AFAICT the indtuples[Size] totals aren't used in between these places; even if they were, the updated values shouldn't be any worse to use. So just move the incrementing of the totals up. It's not very clear why our valgrind-using buildfarm animals haven't noticed this problem, because the relevant code path does seem to be exercised according to the code coverage report. I think the reason that we didn't fix this bug after the first report is that I'd wanted to try to understand that better. However, now that it's been re-discovered let's just be pragmatic and fix it already. Original report by Alexander Lakhin (bug #16329), later rediscovered by Egor Chindyaskin (bug #17874). Patch by Alexander Lakhin (commentary by Pavel Borisov and me). Back-patch to all supported branches. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/16329-7a6aa9b6fa1118a1@postgresql.org Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17874-63ca6c7ce42d2103@postgresql.org
x4m
approved these changes
May 7, 2026
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
gistBuildCallback tried to fetch the size of an index tuple that might have already been freed by gistProcessEmptyingQueue. While this seems to usually be harmless in production builds, in principle it could result in a SIGSEGV, or more likely a bogus value for indtuplesSize leading to poor page-split decisions later in the build.
The memory management here is confusing and could stand to be refactored, but for the moment it seems to be enough to fetch the tuple size sooner. AFAICT the indtuples[Size] totals aren't used in between these places; even if they were, the updated values shouldn't be any worse to use. So just move the incrementing of the totals up.
It's not very clear why our valgrind-using buildfarm animals haven't noticed this problem, because the relevant code path does seem to be exercised according to the code coverage report. I think the reason that we didn't fix this bug after the first report is that I'd wanted to try to understand that better. However, now that it's been re-discovered let's just be pragmatic and fix it already.
Original report by Alexander Lakhin (bug #16329),
later rediscovered by Egor Chindyaskin (bug #17874).
Patch by Alexander Lakhin (commentary by Pavel Borisov and me). Back-patch to all supported branches.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/16329-7a6aa9b6fa1118a1@postgresql.org
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/17874-63ca6c7ce42d2103@postgresql.org
Here are some reminders before you submit the pull request
make installcheck