summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/src
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorTom Lane2025-01-30 20:36:07 +0000
committerTom Lane2025-01-30 20:36:44 +0000
commitb9aa4166fa3823d4f1f76286ca21fcfa991ce036 (patch)
tree3871a47c21276c033def7797e0e789a168fce724 /src
parenta5358c14b2fe2210a1ac0b836f8d54723043fba2 (diff)
Avoid integer overflow while testing wal_skip_threshold condition.
smgrDoPendingSyncs had two distinct risks of integer overflow while deciding which way to ensure durability of a newly-created relation. First, it accumulated the total size of all forks in a variable of type BlockNumber (uint32). While we restrict an individual fork's size to fit in that, I don't believe there's such a restriction on all of them added together. Second, it proceeded to multiply the sum by BLCKSZ, which most certainly could overflow a uint32. (The exact expression is total_blocks * BLCKSZ / 1024. The compiler might choose to optimize that to total_blocks * 8, which is not at quite as much risk of overflow as a literal reading would be, but it's still wrong.) If an overflow did occur it could lead to a poor choice to shove a very large relation into WAL instead of fsync'ing it. This wouldn't be fatal, but it could be inefficient. Change total_blocks to uint64 which should be plenty, and rearrange the comparison calculation to be overflow-safe. I noticed this while looking for ramifications of the proposed change in MAX_KILOBYTES. It's not entirely clear to me why wal_skip_threshold is limited to MAX_KILOBYTES in the first place, but in any case this code is unsafe regardless of the range of wal_skip_threshold. Oversight in c6b92041d which introduced wal_skip_threshold, so back-patch to v13. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/1a01f0-66ec2d80-3b-68487680@27595217 Backpatch-through: 13
Diffstat (limited to 'src')
-rw-r--r--src/backend/catalog/storage.c4
1 files changed, 2 insertions, 2 deletions
diff --git a/src/backend/catalog/storage.c b/src/backend/catalog/storage.c
index e74b471d4b9..eba0e716549 100644
--- a/src/backend/catalog/storage.c
+++ b/src/backend/catalog/storage.c
@@ -763,7 +763,7 @@ smgrDoPendingSyncs(bool isCommit, bool isParallelWorker)
{
ForkNumber fork;
BlockNumber nblocks[MAX_FORKNUM + 1];
- BlockNumber total_blocks = 0;
+ uint64 total_blocks = 0;
SMgrRelation srel;
srel = smgropen(pendingsync->rlocator, INVALID_PROC_NUMBER);
@@ -807,7 +807,7 @@ smgrDoPendingSyncs(bool isCommit, bool isParallelWorker)
* main fork is longer than ever but FSM fork gets shorter.
*/
if (pendingsync->is_truncated ||
- total_blocks * BLCKSZ / 1024 >= wal_skip_threshold)
+ total_blocks >= wal_skip_threshold * (uint64) 1024 / BLCKSZ)
{
/* allocate the initial array, or extend it, if needed */
if (maxrels == 0)