• Tom Lane's avatar
    Add stack-overflow guards in set-operation planning. · 35a52806
    Tom Lane authored
    create_plan_recurse lacked any stack depth check.  This is not per
    our normal coding rules, but I'd supposed it was safe because earlier
    planner processing is more complex and presumably should eat more
    stack.  But bug #15033 from Andrew Grossman shows this isn't true,
    at least not for queries having the form of a many-thousand-way
    INTERSECT stack.
    
    Further testing showed that recurse_set_operations is also capable
    of being crashed in this way, since it likewise will recurse to the
    bottom of a parsetree before calling any support functions that
    might themselves contain any stack checks.  However, its stack
    consumption is only perhaps a third of create_plan_recurse's.
    
    It's possible that this particular problem with create_plan_recurse can
    only manifest in 9.6 and later, since before that we didn't build a Path
    tree for set operations.  But having seen this example, I now have no
    faith in the proposition that create_plan_recurse doesn't need a stack
    check, so back-patch to all supported branches.
    
    Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/20180127050845.28812.58244@wrigleys.postgresql.org
    35a52806
createplan.c 194 KB