On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 8:58 AM, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > On 22.02.2011 15:52, Robert Haas wrote: >> >> On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 8:01 AM, Heikki Linnakangas >> <heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: >>> >>> Yes. It would be good to perform those sanity checks anyway. >> >> I don't think it's good; I think it's absolutely necessary. Otherwise >> someone can generate arbitrary garbage, hash it, and feed it to us. >> No? > > No, the hash is stored in shared memory. The hash of the garbage has to > match.
Oh. Well that's really silly. At that point you might as well just store the snapshot and an integer identifier in shared memory, right? -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
