| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Julian Markwort <julian(dot)markwort(at)uni-muenster(dot)de>, legrand legrand <legrand_legrand(at)hotmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Arthur Zakirov <a(dot)zakirov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, marius(dot)timmer(at)uni-muenster(dot)de, arne(dot)scheffer(at)uni-muenster(dot)de |
| Subject: | Re: [FEATURE PATCH] pg_stat_statements with plans (v02) |
| Date: | 2018-08-20 02:55:38 |
| Message-ID: | 18093.1534733738@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
[ off topic for this patch, but as long as you mentioned switching
to C99 ]
Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> + for(int j = 0; j < numPlans; j++)
> Can't declare a new variable here in C89.
As previously noted, that seems like a nice thing to allow ...
> + pgssPlan *planArray[numPlans];
> Can't use variable length arrays in C89.
... but I'm less excited about this one. Seems like a great opportunity
for unexpected stack overflows, and thence at least the chance for
DOS-causing security attacks. Can we prevent that from being allowed,
if we start using -std=c99?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2018-08-20 03:13:32 | Re: [HACKERS] GnuTLS support |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2018-08-20 02:37:49 | Re: ALTER TABLE on system catalogs |