Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: BUG #1671: Long interval string representation rejected

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>
Cc: Mark Dilger <markdilger(at)yahoo(dot)com>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: BUG #1671: Long interval string representation rejected
Date: 2005-05-19 03:24:29
Message-ID: 28185.1116473069@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs
Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> There are a lot of fixed-size local buffers in that code.  The ones
>> used in output routines seem defensible since the string to be generated
>> is predictable.  The ones that are used for processing input are likely
>> wrong.

> I'm not sure offhand what the upper bounds on legal input for each of 
> the datetime types is.

Well, if you allow for whitespace between tokens then it's immediately
clear that there is no fixed upper bound.  Perhaps it would work to
downcase just one token at a time, so that the max buffer length equals
the max acceptable token?

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-bugs by date

Next:From: Neil ConwayDate: 2005-05-19 03:41:05
Subject: Re: BUG #1671: Long interval string representation rejected
Previous:From: Neil ConwayDate: 2005-05-19 01:58:11
Subject: Re: Fw: Error when install

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group