Re: Handle MAXSTRLEN consistently

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Zsolt Parragi <zsolt(dot)parragi(at)percona(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Handle MAXSTRLEN consistently
Date: 2026-08-13 15:21:13
Message-ID: 3426918.1786634473@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Zsolt Parragi <zsolt(dot)parragi(at)percona(dot)com> writes:
> On Wed, 12 Aug 2026, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> Yeah. I noticed this inconsistency while preparing 23d9ad771,
>> but felt that fixing it was out of scope for a security patch.
>> There's a similar problem with inconsistent enforcement of
>> MAXSTRPOS. Attached is what I had staged to propose post-release.

> Yeah, I missed that MAXSTRPOS case but it is also valid, otherwise the
> changes look identical.

Pushed, thanks for the cross-check.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Daniel Gustafsson 2026-08-13 15:23:00 Re: Clarify or fix SIGINT handling in data checksums launcher
Previous Message Greg Sabino Mullane 2026-08-13 15:19:08 Re: Logical replication row filter loses unchanged toasted columns