On 3/25/18 3:54 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> David Steele writes:
>> On 3/25/18 3:22 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Actually, that code didn't guarantee zero termination under *any*
>>> circumstances; it only happened to work if the stack contained
>>> zeroes to start with.
>
>> Interesting. strncpy() says it
David Steele writes:
> On 3/25/18 3:22 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Actually, that code didn't guarantee zero termination under *any*
>> circumstances; it only happened to work if the stack contained
>> zeroes to start with.
> Interesting. strncpy() says it will pad the destination with NULLs when
> s
On 3/25/18 3:22 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> David Steele writes:
>> On 3/25/18 2:16 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Buildfarm member skink (valgrind) has reported this during its last couple
>>> of runs:
>
>> I think skink is using large values for rel oids and that has exposed a
>> bug. The strncpy doesn't z
David Steele writes:
> On 3/25/18 2:16 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Buildfarm member skink (valgrind) has reported this during its last couple
>> of runs:
> I think skink is using large values for rel oids and that has exposed a
> bug. The strncpy doesn't zero terminate the string if the oid has the
>
I wrote:
> I might be wrong to blame that on this patch, but nothing else has
> touched basebackup.c lately.
Ah, I see the problem, I think. Fixed.
regards, tom lane
On 3/25/18 2:16 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Teodor Sigaev writes:
>> Exclude unlogged tables from base backups
>
> Buildfarm member skink (valgrind) has reported this during its last couple
> of runs:
>
> 2018-03-24 03:18:23.409 UTC [17302] 010_pg_basebackup.pl LOG: received
> replication command: B
Teodor Sigaev writes:
> Exclude unlogged tables from base backups
Buildfarm member skink (valgrind) has reported this during its last couple
of runs:
2018-03-24 03:18:23.409 UTC [17302] 010_pg_basebackup.pl LOG: received
replication command: BASE_BACKUP LABEL 'pg_basebackup base backup'NOW
