IBM is trying to find the answer to this but I thought I would throw
this out here to see if anyone can help me.  I am compiling a user
defined type on AIX and it fails when I try to use it.  The type is
chkpass and it is in the contrib directory.  It fails with a core dump
at line 88 in chkpass.c.  The line reads as follows.

    result = (chkpass *) palloc(sizeof(chkpass));

The top of the backtrace looks like this.

#0  0x0 in ?? () from (unknown load module)
#1  0xd1087a60 in chkpass_in (fcinfo=0x0) at chkpass.c:88
#2  0x10045cf4 in or_clause (clause=0x0) at clauses.c:211
#3  0x10075d68 in int82ge (fcinfo=0x1015cfc8) at int8.c:343
#4  0x1005909c in _readArrayRef () at readfuncs.c:924
#5  0x10059b68 in _readSeqScan () at readfuncs.c:600

It looks like the dynamically loaded object (chkpass.so) can't determine
the address of palloc() from the parent.  I assume I need a flag for the
compile either on the main build to export the addresses or on the build
of chkpass to tell it where to look up the addresses.  Anyone been
through this that might be able to shed some light?

-- 
D'Arcy J.M. Cain <darcy@{druid|vex}.net>   |  Democracy is three wolves
http://www.druid.net/darcy/                |  and a sheep voting on
+1 416 425 1212     (DoD#0082)    (eNTP)   |  what's for dinner.

Mon, 28 May 2001 11:56:17 -0400 (EDT)
darcy@druid.net (D'Arcy J.M. Cain)
User functions and AIX
darcy@druid.net (D'Arcy J.M. Cain) writes:
> The top of the backtrace looks like this.

> #0  0x0 in ?? () from (unknown load module)
> #1  0xd1087a60 in chkpass_in (fcinfo=0x0) at chkpass.c:88
> #2  0x10045cf4 in or_clause (clause=0x0) at clauses.c:211
> #3  0x10075d68 in int82ge (fcinfo=0x1015cfc8) at int8.c:343
> #4  0x1005909c in _readArrayRef () at readfuncs.c:924
> #5  0x10059b68 in _readSeqScan () at readfuncs.c:600

I don't believe a word of that backtrace, and neither should you.
The alleged call arcs at levels below #1 do not exist in the code.
Ergo, I doubt the top two levels can be trusted either.

			regards, tom lane

Mon, 28 May 2001 13:21:09 -0400
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: User functions and AIX 
Thus spake Tom Lane
> darcy@druid.net (D'Arcy J.M. Cain) writes:
> > The top of the backtrace looks like this.
> 
> > #0  0x0 in ?? () from (unknown load module)
> > #1  0xd1087a60 in chkpass_in (fcinfo=0x0) at chkpass.c:88
> > #2  0x10045cf4 in or_clause (clause=0x0) at clauses.c:211
> > #3  0x10075d68 in int82ge (fcinfo=0x1015cfc8) at int8.c:343
> > #4  0x1005909c in _readArrayRef () at readfuncs.c:924
> > #5  0x10059b68 in _readSeqScan () at readfuncs.c:600
> 
> I don't believe a word of that backtrace, and neither should you.
> The alleged call arcs at levels below #1 do not exist in the code.
> Ergo, I doubt the top two levels can be trusted either.

Can you clarify?  I see or_clause takes a clause arg and I assumed that
the fcinfo is hidden in the macro.  I don't understand how the arg for
chkpass_in can be NULL.  I'm also not sure why these functions are involved
in reading the chkpass type.

Hmm.  I just rebooted and reran the test (SELECT 'hello'::chkpass) and
it gave me a different stacktrace.  It looks like this.

#0  0x0 in ?? () from (unknown load module)
#1  0xd1085a60 in chkpass_in (fcinfo=0x0) at chkpass.c:88
#2  0x1004b874 in OidFunctionCall3 (functionId=269952520, arg1=269952532, 
    arg2=269952540, arg3=269952548) at fmgr.c:1136
#3  0x1007f350 in stringTypeDatum (tp=0x10172694, string=0x101726a0 "pendant", 
    atttypmod=269952680) at parse_type.c:181
#4  0x10060630 in parser_typecast_constant (expr=0x10172794, 
    typename=0x101727a0) at parse_expr.c:876
#5  0x10061188 in transformExpr (pstate=0x10172910, expr=0x10172920, 
    precedence=269953332) at parse_expr.c:118
#6  0x10076f28 in transformTargetEntry (pstate=0x258, node=0x5c, 
    expr=0x2ff1df70, colname=0x101729f4 "inner", resjunk=16 '\020')
    at parse_target.c:56
#7  0x10077198 in transformTargetList (pstate=0x10172ab8, 
    targetlist=0x10172ac0) at parse_target.c:158
#8  0x10093c10 in transformSelectStmt (pstate=0x10172b80, stmt=0x10172b88)
    at analyze.c:1835
#9  0x1009497c in transformStmt (pstate=0x20000890, parseTree=0x2001f43c)
    at analyze.c:226
#10 0x10094ca4 in parse_analyze (parseTree=0x100195f8, 
    parentParseState=0x200008a4) at analyze.c:86

I still can't follow the logic through the code.  And chkpass_in is still
being called with a null pointer according to this.

-- 
D'Arcy J.M. Cain <darcy@{druid|vex}.net>   |  Democracy is three wolves
http://www.druid.net/darcy/                |  and a sheep voting on
+1 416 425 1212     (DoD#0082)    (eNTP)   |  what's for dinner.

Mon, 28 May 2001 15:06:07 -0400 (EDT)
darcy@druid.net (D'Arcy J.M. Cain)
Re: User functions and AIX
darcy@druid.net (D'Arcy J.M. Cain) writes:
> I'm also not sure why these functions are involved
> in reading the chkpass type.

Precisely my point: they're not.  That backtrace is false data.

> Hmm.  I just rebooted and reran the test (SELECT 'hello'::chkpass) and
> it gave me a different stacktrace.  It looks like this.

> #0  0x0 in ?? () from (unknown load module)
> #1  0xd1085a60 in chkpass_in (fcinfo=0x0) at chkpass.c:88
> #2  0x1004b874 in OidFunctionCall3 (functionId=269952520, arg1=269952532, 
>     arg2=269952540, arg3=269952548) at fmgr.c:1136
> #3  0x1007f350 in stringTypeDatum (tp=0x10172694, string=0x101726a0 "pendant", 
>     atttypmod=269952680) at parse_type.c:181
> #4  0x10060630 in parser_typecast_constant (expr=0x10172794, 
>     typename=0x101727a0) at parse_expr.c:876

This one I believe to the extent of the series of function calls, but
it's still giving you wrong info about the passed parameters, which
is pretty common if you compiled at -O2 or higher.  Try recompiling with
"-O0 -g" if you need trustworthy parameter info from the backtrace.

			regards, tom lane

Mon, 28 May 2001 15:15:57 -0400
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: User functions and AIX 
Thus spake Tom Lane
> darcy@druid.net (D'Arcy J.M. Cain) writes:
> > I'm also not sure why these functions are involved
> > in reading the chkpass type.
> 
> Precisely my point: they're not.  That backtrace is false data.
> 
> > Hmm.  I just rebooted and reran the test (SELECT 'hello'::chkpass) and
> > it gave me a different stacktrace.  It looks like this.
> 
> > #0  0x0 in ?? () from (unknown load module)
> > #1  0xd1085a60 in chkpass_in (fcinfo=0x0) at chkpass.c:88
> > #2  0x1004b874 in OidFunctionCall3 (functionId=269952520, arg1=269952532, 
> >     arg2=269952540, arg3=269952548) at fmgr.c:1136
> > #3  0x1007f350 in stringTypeDatum (tp=0x10172694, string=0x101726a0 "pendant", 
> >     atttypmod=269952680) at parse_type.c:181
> > #4  0x10060630 in parser_typecast_constant (expr=0x10172794, 
> >     typename=0x101727a0) at parse_expr.c:876
> 
> This one I believe to the extent of the series of function calls, but
> it's still giving you wrong info about the passed parameters, which
> is pretty common if you compiled at -O2 or higher.  Try recompiling with
> "-O0 -g" if you need trustworthy parameter info from the backtrace.

Is that an AIX thing?  I generally get reasonable traces on NetBSD.

Anyway, I took your advice and now I get this.

#0  0x0 in ?? () from (unknown load module)
#1  0xd1085aac in chkpass_in (fcinfo=0x2ff1dcb8) at chkpass.c:88
#2  0x1004b874 in OidFunctionCall3 (functionId=269952520, arg1=269952532, 
    arg2=269952540, arg3=269952548) at fmgr.c:1136
#3  0x1007f350 in stringTypeDatum (tp=0x10172694, string=0x101726a0 "pendant", 
    atttypmod=269952680) at parse_type.c:181
#4  0x10060630 in parser_typecast_constant (expr=0x10172794, 
    typename=0x101727a0) at parse_expr.c:876
#5  0x10061188 in transformExpr (pstate=0x10172910, expr=0x10172920, 
    precedence=269953332) at parse_expr.c:118
#6  0x10076f28 in transformTargetEntry (pstate=0x258, node=0x5c, 
    expr=0x2ff1df70, colname=0x101729f4 "inner", resjunk=16 '\020')
    at parse_target.c:56
#7  0x10077198 in transformTargetList (pstate=0x10172ab8, 
    targetlist=0x10172ac0) at parse_target.c:158
#8  0x10093c10 in transformSelectStmt (pstate=0x10172b80, stmt=0x10172b88)
    at analyze.c:1835
#9  0x1009497c in transformStmt (pstate=0x20000890, parseTree=0x2001f43c)
    at analyze.c:226
#10 0x10094ca4 in parse_analyze (parseTree=0x100195f8, 
    parentParseState=0x200008a4) at analyze.c:86

Looking better.  It still seems to be the same error I saw to start with
though.  It seems that the loaded dynamic object can't find the address
for palloc() and so jumps to 0.  I'm sure that it is an AIX thing but
even IBM can't seem to find the problem.

-- 
D'Arcy J.M. Cain <darcy@{druid|vex}.net>   |  Democracy is three wolves
http://www.druid.net/darcy/                |  and a sheep voting on
+1 416 425 1212     (DoD#0082)    (eNTP)   |  what's for dinner.

Mon, 28 May 2001 17:04:52 -0400 (EDT)
darcy@druid.net (D'Arcy J.M. Cain)
Re: User functions and AIX