| From: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Euler Taveira de Oliveira <euler(at)timbira(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, 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: | 2012-02-28 06:21:12 |
| Message-ID: | CAHGQGwHsDkjnHzPugEHqnvd213v278feUrD0a+XQHgwq_nMtUw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 8:53 AM, 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.
After this patch will have been committed, it would be better to change
pg_xlogfile_name() and pg_xlogfile_name_offset() so that they use
the validate_xlog_location() function to validate the input.
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Shigeru Hanada | 2012-02-28 07:44:08 | Re: How to know a table has been modified? |
| Previous Message | Ants Aasma | 2012-02-28 06:15:11 | Re: Initial 9.2 pgbench write results |