Re: Bug in UTF8-Validation Code?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, Michael Fuhr <mike(at)fuhr(dot)org>, Mario Weilguni <mweilguni(at)sime(dot)com>, "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Albe Laurenz <all(at)adv(dot)magwien(dot)gv(dot)at>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Bug in UTF8-Validation Code?
Date: 2007-03-17 16:10:06
Message-ID: 11744.1174147806@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> Last year Jeff suggested adding something like:
> pg_verifymbstr(string,strlen(string),0);
> to each relevant input routine. Would that be an acceptable solution?

The problem with that is that it duplicates effort: in many cases
(especially COPY IN) the data's already been validated. I'm not sure
how to fix that, but I think you'll get some push-back if you double
the encoding verification work in COPY for nothing.

Given that we are moving away from backslash-enabled literals, I'm
not as convinced as some that this must be fixed...

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Magnus Hagander 2007-03-17 16:17:11 Re: Bison 2.1 on win32
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2007-03-17 15:56:30 Re: [PATCHES] xpath_array with namespaces support