Re: [HACKERS] pg_upgrade in 9.5 broken for adminpack

2016-01-03 Thread Tom Lane
Andreas Seltenreich writes: > Shouldn't there be some validation of arguments now that the function is > no longer marked strict? Currently, unprivileged users can crash the > server calling binary_upgrade_create_empty_extension with null > arguments. Found using sqlsmith. Good catch, thanks!

Re: [HACKERS] pg_upgrade in 9.5 broken for adminpack

2016-01-03 Thread Andreas Seltenreich
Bruce Momjian writes: > On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 11:29:07PM -0700, Jeff Janes wrote: >> Of course after sending that it became obvious.  The C function is not >> getting >> called because the SQL function is marked as being strict, yet is called with >> NULL arguments. >> >> Trivial patch attache

Re: [HACKERS] pg_upgrade in 9.5 broken for adminpack

2015-04-17 Thread Bruce Momjian
On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 11:29:07PM -0700, Jeff Janes wrote: > Of course after sending that it became obvious.  The C function is not getting > called because the SQL function is marked as being strict, yet is called with > NULL arguments. > > Trivial patch attached to unset strict flag in pg_proc.

Re: [HACKERS] pg_upgrade in 9.5 broken for adminpack

2015-04-17 Thread Bruce Momjian
On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 04:11:44PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 3:29 PM, Jeff Janes wrote: > > Of course after sending that it became obvious. The C function is not > > getting called because the SQL function is marked as being strict, yet is > > called with NULL argumen

Re: [HACKERS] pg_upgrade in 9.5 broken for adminpack

2015-04-17 Thread Michael Paquier
On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 3:29 PM, Jeff Janes wrote: > Of course after sending that it became obvious. The C function is not > getting called because the SQL function is marked as being strict, yet is > called with NULL arguments. > > Trivial patch attached to unset strict flag in pg_proc.h. > > But

Re: [HACKERS] pg_upgrade in 9.5 broken for adminpack

2015-04-16 Thread Jeff Janes
On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 11:04 PM, Jeff Janes wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 7:37 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > >> On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 07:33:50PM -0700, Jeff Janes wrote: >> > pg_upgrade was recently broken for use upgrading from a system with >> adminpack >> > installed. >> > >> > ... > Th

Re: [HACKERS] pg_upgrade in 9.5 broken for adminpack

2015-04-16 Thread Jeff Janes
On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 7:37 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 07:33:50PM -0700, Jeff Janes wrote: > > pg_upgrade was recently broken for use upgrading from a system with > adminpack > > installed. > > > > Breaking commit is: > > > > commit 30982be4e5019684e1772dd9170aaa53f5a8e89

Re: [HACKERS] pg_upgrade in 9.5 broken for adminpack

2015-04-16 Thread Bruce Momjian
On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 07:33:50PM -0700, Jeff Janes wrote: > pg_upgrade was recently broken for use upgrading from a system with adminpack > installed. > > Breaking commit is: > > commit 30982be4e5019684e1772dd9170aaa53f5a8e894 > Author: Peter Eisentraut > >     Integrate pg_upgrade_support mo

[HACKERS] pg_upgrade in 9.5 broken for adminpack

2015-04-16 Thread Jeff Janes
pg_upgrade was recently broken for use upgrading from a system with adminpack installed. Breaking commit is: commit 30982be4e5019684e1772dd9170aaa53f5a8e894 Author: Peter Eisentraut Integrate pg_upgrade_support module into backend from pg_upgrade_dump_12870.log pg_restore: creating EXTEN