Em qua., 10 de set. de 2025 às 17:35, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> escreveu:
Tomas Vondra <tomas@vondra.me> writes: > While testing a different patch, I tried running with address sanitizer > on rpi5, running the 32-bit OS (which AFAIK is 64-bit kernel and 32-bit > user space). With that, stats_ext regression tests fail like this:
> extended_stats.c:1082:27: runtime error: store to misaligned address > 0x036671dc for type 'Datum', which requires 8 byte alignment > 0x036671dc: note: pointer points here > 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 7e > 7f 08 00 00 00 7f 7f 7f 7f > ^
> This happens because build_sorted_items() does palloc(), and then > accesses the pointer as array of structs, with a Datum field. And it > apparently expects the pointer to be a multiple of 8 bytes. Isn't that a > bit strange, with 32-bit user space? The pointer is indeed a multiple of > 4B, so maybe the expected alignment is wrong?
I think build_sorted_items is plainly at fault here, where it does
/* Compute the total amount of memory we need (both items and values). */ len = data->numrows * sizeof(SortItem) + nvalues * (sizeof(Datum) + sizeof(bool));
/* Allocate the memory and split it into the pieces. */ ptr = palloc0(len);
This is silently assuming that sizeof(SortItem) is a multiple of alignof(Datum), which on a 32-bit-pointer platform is not true any longer. We ought to MAXALIGN the two occurrences of data->numrows * sizeof(SortItem).
We possibly have two more instances?
1. Function ndistinct_for_combination (src/backend/statistics/mvdistinct.c)