Re: [GENERAL] pgstattuple triggered checkpoint failure and database outage? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Heikki Linnakangas
Subject Re: [GENERAL] pgstattuple triggered checkpoint failure and database outage?
Date
Msg-id 49D22F5F.8050302@enterprisedb.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [GENERAL] pgstattuple triggered checkpoint failure and database outage?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: [GENERAL] pgstattuple triggered checkpoint failure and database outage?
List pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane wrote:
> Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com> writes:
>> Tom Lane wrote:
>>> A quick look at contrib/pgstattuple shows that it makes no effort
>>> whatsoever to avoid reading temp tables belonging to other sessions.
> 
>> contrib/pageinspect has the same bug. Not surprising as it was largely 
>> inspired by pgstattuple.
> 
> Given the seriousness of the consequences (forced database shutdown is
> no fun), I wonder whether we should install some low-level defense
> against this type of problem; ie teach ReadBuffer to throw error if
> asked to read a block from someone else's temp table.

That would be nice.

> This isn't entirely trivial because it's presently expensive to
> determine whether a table is someone else's temp table: it takes a
> system catalog lookup.   I'm not even sure that it'd be safe to have
> the relcache do it and cache the result --- it could lead to infinite
> recursion.  (At the very least this would promote pg_namespace into
> the set of critical relcache entries.)

You could hard code that PG_CATALOG_NAMESPACE is not a temp namespace. I 
believe that would stop the recursion. Would that avoid promoting 
pg_namespace to critical status, too?

> The solution that seems most practical to me is to add a bool column
> to pg_class indicating "this is a temp table".  Then, if that flag
> is set but it's not our own temp table (which we can tell easily),
> refuse to read.  However, a patch of that size would take a little
> while to develop, and I'm not entirely sure it's worth the trouble.
> I can't remember having seen bugs of this type before.

In addition to the one Alvaro mentioned, I recall having problems with 
this when working on the patch to allow temporary file access with two 
phase commit in autumn.

--   Heikki Linnakangas  EnterpriseDB   http://www.enterprisedb.com


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: Partitioning feature ...
Next
From: Greg Stark
Date:
Subject: Fwd: Abwesend: [GENERAL] string_to_array with empty input