| From: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Euler Taveira de Oliveira <euler(at)timbira(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pgsql Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: xlog location arithmetic |
| Date: | 2012-03-04 11:26:36 |
| Message-ID: | CABUevEy3nqhMvyGQRbYYSdYjuB1B_Kgc_kxHBnZqdUMw+z6c1Q@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 00:53, Euler Taveira de Oliveira
<euler(at)timbira(dot)com> wrote:
> On 25-02-2012 09:23, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> Do we even *need* the validate_xlog_location() function? If we just
>> remove those calls, won't we still catch all the incorrectly formatted
>> ones in the errors of the sscanf() calls? Or am I too deep into
>> weekend-mode and missing something obvious?
>>
> sscanf() is too fragile for input sanity check. Try
> pg_xlog_location_diff('12/3', '-10/0'), for example. I won't object removing
> that function if you protect xlog location input from silly users.
Ah, good point. No, that's the reason I was missing :-)
Patch applied, thanks!
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Magnus Hagander | 2012-03-04 11:26:56 | Re: xlog location arithmetic |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2012-03-04 09:59:10 | Re: RFC: Making TRUNCATE more "MVCC-safe" |