Re: [HACKERS] SEGFAULT in HEAD with replication - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: [HACKERS] SEGFAULT in HEAD with replication
Date
Msg-id 4858.1484870985@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] [JDBC] SEGFAULT in HEAD with replication  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] SEGFAULT in HEAD with replication  (Jorge Solórzano <jorsol@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
I wrote:
> Hmm ... that line was last touched by ab1f0c822, so I'm betting that
> I broke it somehow, but I'm not sure how.
> It looks like S_3 might have been parsed from a totally empty source
> string?  But if that's the trigger, I'd think it'd be entirely trivial
> to reproduce.

Oh, duh: the reason it's not trivial to reproduce is you have to try
to bind an empty prepared statement *in an already-aborted transaction*.

Will push a fix in a bit.

            regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Jorge Solórzano
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] SEGFAULT in HEAD with replication
Next
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function