| From: | Xuneng Zhou <xunengzhou(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
| Cc: | Chao Li <li(dot)evan(dot)chao(at)gmail(dot)com>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Add tests for object size limits of injection points |
| Date: | 2025-11-10 10:27:41 |
| Message-ID: | CABPTF7VxYp4Hny1h+7ejURY-P4O5-K8WZg79Q3GUx13cQ6B2kg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi Michael, Chao,
On Mon, Nov 10, 2025 at 11:32 AM Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 10, 2025 at 10:30:31AM +0800, Chao Li wrote:
> > Is really confused. The error message says “maximum of 64”, but the
> > test right uses a name of length 64. I know that the tricky is the
> > ‘\0’ terminator, but should SQL writer have to keep mind about the
> > ‘\0’ terminator? Should they just consider maximum length as 63?
>
> Right. We could add a "- 1" to the error message printed.
Thanks for the patch. I also agree with Chao's suggestion that the
error message better reflects the actual character limits. I
implemented a patch for that and updated the test patch as well.
Please check.
Best,
Xuneng
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| v2-0001-injection_points-Report-actual-character-limits-i.patch | application/octet-stream | 2.3 KB |
| v2-0002-injection_points-Add-tests-for-name-limits.patch | application/octet-stream | 2.8 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | BharatDB | 2025-11-10 10:41:21 | Re: Non-blocking archiver process |
| Previous Message | jian he | 2025-11-10 10:22:23 | Re: Change COPY ... ON_ERROR ignore to ON_ERROR ignore_row |