On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 8:56 AM, Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote: > That made me wonder if it's not actually a mistake for > MemoryContextAllocExtended() size parameter to be declared > Size/size_t. That prevents it from detecting such overflows, forcing > code like the above on callsites. > > Comments?
The existing interface of MemoryContextAlloc do not care much about anything except Size, so I'd just give the responsability to the caller to do checks like queue != (Size) queue when queue is a uint64 for example. And I can see that your patch is using uint32 for SH_TYPE->size. -- Michael -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers