On 06/14/2016 05:50 PM, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote: > 14.06.2016 16:43, Alex Peshkoff wrote: >> If you think it's pool's bug > No, I don't think that missing protection from double deallocation of > blocks is a bug. > >
Suggested in your patch has one disadvantage - block can be overwritten by caller before deallocating it second time. We can add better check - some magic numbers in the beginning of the pool. That will be reliable as long as someone does not overwrite that bytes (bug by itself) or puts that numbers to next block (will miss a bug). But unfortunately this is not too informative - all we can do is abort() but now we have segfault that happens 2 or 3 frames deeper. May be MemoryPool::printContents() will give you some idea? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ What NetFlow Analyzer can do for you? Monitors network bandwidth and traffic patterns at an interface-level. Reveals which users, apps, and protocols are consuming the most bandwidth. Provides multi-vendor support for NetFlow, J-Flow, sFlow and other flows. Make informed decisions using capacity planning reports. https://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/305295220;132659582;e Firebird-Devel mailing list, web interface at https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-devel
