Re: Client Messages

From: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Jim Mlodgenski <jimmy76(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Client Messages
Date: 2012-03-01 02:39:53
Message-ID: CAHGQGwGxEWrAonEpTteadqk_mrMELsgwa1P4t8vWfNG3Km+1gQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 4:13 AM, Alvaro Herrera
<alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Excerpts from Heikki Linnakangas's message of jue ene 26 15:58:58 -0300 2012:
>> On 26.01.2012 17:31, Tom Lane wrote:
>
>> > The idea that occurs to me is to have the code that uses the GUC do a
>> > verify_mbstr(noerror) on it, and silently ignore it if it doesn't pass
>> > (maybe with a LOG message).  This would have to be documented of course,
>> > but it seems better than the potential consequences of trying to send a
>> > wrongly-encoded string.
>>
>> Hmm, fine with me. It would be nice to plug the hole that these bogus
>> characters can leak elsewhere into the system through current_setting,
>> though. Perhaps we could put the verify_mbstr() call somewhere in guc.c,
>> to forbid incorrectly encoded characters from being stored in the guc
>> variable in the first place.
>
> This patch is listed as "Needs review" but that seems to be wrong --
> it's "waiting on author", I think.

Yes. I marked the patch as "waiting on author".

>  Do we have an updated patch?  Fujii?

No. I believe that the author Jim will submit the updated version.

Regards,

--
Fujii Masao
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2012-03-01 03:47:04 Re: pg_upgrade --logfile option documentation
Previous Message Tom Lane 2012-03-01 00:48:47 Re: 16-bit page checksums for 9.2