Re: Reworks of CustomScan serialization/deserialization

From: Kouhei Kaigai <kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com>
To: Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Reworks of CustomScan serialization/deserialization
Date: 2016-03-10 07:08:24
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> -----Original Message-----
> From: pgsql-hackers-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org
> [mailto:pgsql-hackers-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org] On Behalf Of Petr Jelinek
> Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2016 11:01 AM
> To: Kaigai Kouhei(海外 浩平); pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Reworks of CustomScan serialization/deserialization
> On 10/03/16 02:18, Kouhei Kaigai wrote:
> >
> >> I am not sure I like the fact that we have this EXTNODENAME_MAX_LEN and
> >> now the CUSTOM_NAME_MAX_LEN with the same length and also they are both
> >> same lenght as NAMEDATALEN I wonder if this shouldn't be somehow
> >> squished to less defines.
> >>
> > Hmm. I just followed the manner in extensible.c, because this label was
> > initially NAMEDATALEN, then Robert changed it with EXTNODENAME_MAX_LEN.
> > I guess he avoid to apply same label on different entities - NAMEDATALEN
> > is a limitation for NameData type, but identifier of extensible-node and
> > custom-scan node are not restricted by.
> >
> Makes sense.
> >> Also in RegisterCustomScanMethods
> >> + Assert(strlen(methods->CustomName) <= CUSTOM_NAME_MAX_LEN);
> >>
> >> Shouldn't this be actually "if" with ereport() considering this is
> >> public API and extensions can pass anything there? (for that matter same
> >> is true for RegisterExtensibleNodeMethods but that's already committed).
> >>
> > Hmm. I don't have clear answer which is better. The reason why I put
> > Assert() here is that only c-binary extension uses this interface, thus,
> > author will fix up the problem of too long name prior to its release.
> > Of course, if-with-ereport() also informs extension author the name is
> > too long.
> > One downside of Assert() may be, it makes oversight if --enable-cassert
> > was not specified.
> >
> Well that's exactly my problem, this should IMHO throw error even
> without --enable-cassert. It's not like it's some performance sensitive
> API where if would be big problem, ensuring correctness of the input is
> more imporant here IMHO.
We may need to fix up RegisterExtensibleNodeMethods() first.

Also, length limitation is (EXTNODENAME_MAX_LEN-1) because the last byte
is consumed by '\0' character. In fact, hash, match and keycopy function
of HTAB for string keys deal with the first (keysize - 1) bytes.
So, strkey(extnodename) == EXTNODENAME_MAX_LEN is not legal.

NEC Business Creation Division / PG-Strom Project
KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com>

Attachment Content-Type Size
pgsql-v9.6-extensible-namelen-check-by-ereport.patch application/octet-stream 740 bytes

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2016-03-10 07:22:11 Re: OOM in libpq and infinite loop with getCopyStart()
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2016-03-10 06:53:43 Re: Add generate_series(date,date) and generate_series(date,date,integer)