[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

Re: search_candidates on win32

Howard Chu wrote: 
We need a better solution here, since an arbitrarily complex search filter
will be able to trash the server,

oh. that's not good. I thought the needed stack space was 'large' but 'fixed'.


Unfortunately it feels like we're going to have to resort to using some form
of malloc here, which is going to cost some performance in the filter
evaluation, but it seems like the only safe approach.


That is my ( uninformed ) opinion as well :). With a reasonable attempt at memory management, I do not believe the performance hit would be much at all.

--Kervin


  -- Howard Chu
  Chief Architect, Symas Corp.       Director, Highland Sun
  http://www.symas.com               http://highlandsun.com/hyc
  Symas: Premier OpenSource Development and Support


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-openldap-devel@OpenLDAP.org
[mailto:owner-openldap-devel@OpenLDAP.org]On Behalf Of Kervin Pierre
Sent: Sunday, March 17, 2002 11:34 PM
To: openldap-devel
Subject: search_candidates on win32


Hello,

I can reliably crash slapd on win32 by running a ldapsearch that is not
scope == base. CVS-14MAR02

I think the problem is in the search_candidates() function in
servers/slapd/back-bdb/search.c ...

static int search_candidates( ... )
{
        int rc;
        Filter          f, scopef, rf, xf;
        ID              tmp[BDB_IDL_UM_SIZE];
        AttributeAssertion aa_ref;
...

The declaration 'ID tmp[BDB_IDL_UM_SIZE];' causes a stack overflow.

On my system, this evaluates to 'unsigned long tmp[131070]'.

My question is, isn't that array to big?  Can someone shed some light on
this?


--Kervin


--
http://linuxquestions.org/ - Ask linux questions, give linux help.
http://splint.org/ - Write safe C code. splint source-code analyzer.







--
http://linuxquestions.org/ - Ask linux questions, give linux help.
http://splint.org/ - Write safe C code. splint source-code analyzer.