|From:||Marko Tiikkaja <marko(at)joh(dot)to>|
|To:||Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>|
|Subject:||Re: pgcrypto: PGP armor headers|
|Views:||Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email|
On 9/10/14 1:38 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> On 09/10/2014 02:26 PM, Marko Tiikkaja wrote:
>> So I wonder if I shouldn't try and instead keep the
>> code closer to what it is in HEAD right now; I could call
>> enlargeStringInfo() first, then hand out a pointer to b64_encode (or
>> b64_decode()) and finally increment StringInfoData.len by how much was
>> actually written. That would keep the code changes a lot smaller, too.
> Yeah, that sounds reasonable.
OK, I've attemped to do that in the attached. I'm pretty sure I didn't
get all of the overflows right, so someone should probably take a really
good look at it. (I'm not too confident the original code got them
right either, but whatever).
Speaking of good looks, should I add it to the next commitfest as a new
patch, or should we try and get someone to review it like this?
>> I'm also not sure why we need to keep a copy of the base64
>> encoding/decoding logic instead of exporting it in utils/adt/encode.c.
> Good question...
I've left this question unanswered for now. We can fix it later,
independently of this patch.
|Next Message||Alvaro Herrera||2014-09-10 13:37:42||Re: PENDING_LIST_CLEANUP_SIZE - maximum size of GIN pending list Re: HEAD seems to generate larger WAL regarding GIN index|
|Previous Message||Fujii Masao||2014-09-10 12:06:28||Re: ALTER SYSTEM RESET?|