Re: Initial review of xslt with no limits patch

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Mike Fowler <mike(at)mlfowler(dot)com>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Initial review of xslt with no limits patch
Date: 2010-08-09 14:18:20
Message-ID: AANLkTikffR8VpuWGUP8r_1RemgTCkCQk9D3jDFkzkYWU@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 10:14 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Mike Fowler <mike(at)mlfowler(dot)com> writes:
>> Turns out the bug was filed in 2005 (see
>> https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=307061). They are currently
>> taking a fairly loose interpretation of the XSLT spec. However that was
>> only one aspect of the concern. The other was that no errors were being
>> reported back in psql when the libxslt is generating errors. Is this
>> desirable?
>
> Uh, no; if we're failing to detect an error that the library does
> report, that's our bug (and another indication of the immaturity
> of this code :-()).

Right. So, what about Mike's idea of extracting this into a new
contrib module, perhaps contrib/xslt? That might also provide a good
excuse to jettison any details of the existing interfaces that we
happen to find unfortunate.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise Postgres Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2010-08-09 14:20:39 Re: review: xml_is_well_formed
Previous Message Tom Lane 2010-08-09 14:14:03 Re: Initial review of xslt with no limits patch