On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 2:13 PM, Peter Geoghegan <pe...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > On 15 November 2012 18:13, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Ah, yeah. I wondered in passing about that but forgot to follow up on >> it. The problem specifically is that the intermediate result >> memtupsize * newmemtuples might overflow. I believe that the old >> memtupsize can never be more than 2^26 bytes, because the allocation >> limit is 1GB and each SortTuple is 16 bytes. > > Do you mean the intermediate result of memtupsize * allowedMem?
Yes. > Oh, > yeah, that could overflow rather easily on a platform where long is > only 32-bit. Or even 64-bit, with really large values of work_mem. > We're multiplying the entire current allocation size of > the array by the maximum length. I guess the fact that you didn't spot > it made me overconfident. :-) Ha! So what's next here? Do you want to work on these issue some more? Or does Jeff? I'd like to see this go in, but I'm not sure I have the bandwidth to do the legwork myself. -- 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
