| From: | John Gray <jgray(at)azuli(dot)co(dot)uk> |
|---|---|
| To: | Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp>, tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org, lockhart(at)fourpalms(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: unknownin/out patch (was [HACKERS] PQescapeBytea is |
| Date: | 2002-04-09 09:11:02 |
| Message-ID: | 1018343465.3587.56.camel@adzuki |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
On Tue, 2002-04-09 at 06:57, Joe Conway wrote:
[snipped]
> > Yes, I was just looking at that also. It doesn't consider the case of n
> > = -1 for MB. See the lines:
> >
> > #ifdef MULTIBYTE
> > eml = pg_database_encoding_max_length ();
> >
> > if (eml > 1)
> > {
> > sm = 0;
> > sn = (m + n) * eml + 3;
> > }
> > #endif
> >
> > When n = -1 this does the wrong thing. And also a few lines later:
> >
> > #ifdef MULTIBYTE
> > len = pg_mbstrlen_with_len (VARDATA (string), sn - 3);
> >
> > I think both places need to test for n = -1. Do you agree?
> >
Sorry folks! I hadn't thought through the logic of that in the n = -1
and multibyte case. The patch looks OK to me.
John
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2002-04-09 13:20:22 | Re: timeout implementation issues |
| Previous Message | Michael Loftis | 2002-04-09 08:47:53 | Re: timeout implementation issues |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2002-04-09 18:13:19 | Re: unknownin/out patch (was [HACKERS] PQescapeBytea is |
| Previous Message | Joe Conway | 2002-04-09 05:57:47 | Re: unknownin/out patch (was [HACKERS] PQescapeBytea is |