Re: [boost] [serialization] [1.35.0] Potential Memory Buster, Deserializing std::vector<T, boost::pool_allocator<T> >

From: Dean Michael Berris (mikhailberis_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-06-15 04:44:42

On Sun, Jun 15, 2008 at 2:53 PM, Matthias Troyer <troyer_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
> On Jun 15, 2008, at 7:16 AM, Dean Michael Berris wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Jun 15, 2008 at 2:43 AM, Matthias Troyer <troyer_at_[hidden]>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Jun 14, 2008, at 5:35 PM, Dean Michael Berris wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sat, Jun 14, 2008 at 5:27 PM, Matthias Troyer <troyer_at_[hidden]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Jun 13, 2008, at 9:55 AM, Dean Michael Berris wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The question I have is why is this function commented out in the
>>>>>> 1.35.0
>>>>>> release?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> We commented this out since we found out just before the release that
>>>>> this
>>>>> optimization prevents tracking of vectors. 1.36 will implement this in
>>>>> a
>>>>> slightly different way, which will enable some more optimizations.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Okay, sounds good to me.
>>>
>>> It is on the trunk now
>>>
>>
>> Wow, that was quick. Thanks again Matthias!
>>
>> Let me try and convince people over here to use the latest in the trunk.
>
> If you don't need tracking of vectors you can just uncomment the commented
> out parts in 1.35.0
>

This sounds like a good plan too.

When you say the version in 1.35.0 cannot track vectors, does that
mean we cannot merely tell the difference between a serialized array
and a serialized vector?

I'm a little lost as to why there should be a difference between a
normally serialized/deserialized vector and a static array (T[]). More
precisely, a serialized array should be deserializable to a vector and
a serialized vector should be deserializable to a statically
(appropriately) sized array as well.

Or is there a deeper reason why this behavior isn't acceptable?

-- 
Dean Michael C. Berris
Software Engineer, Friendster, Inc.