Re: pg_dump multi VALUES INSERT

On Sun, Feb 3, 2019 at 11:00 AM Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> wrote:

>
> Hello David,
>
> >> I do not understand why dump_inserts declaration has left the "flags for
> >> options" section.
> >
> > I moved that because it's no longer just a flag. It now stores an int
> value.
>
> Hmmm. Indeed, all th "int"s of this section should be "bool" instead. Now,
> some "flags" do not appear although the culd (clear, createdb, blobs), so
> the logic is kinda fuzzy anyway. Do as you wish.
>
> >> I'd suggest not to rely on "atoi" because it does not check the argument
> >> syntax, so basically anything is accepted, eg "1O" is 1;
> >
> > Seems like it's good enough for --jobs and --compress. Do you think
> > those should be changed too? or what's the reason to hold
> > --rows-per-insert to a different standard?
>
> I think that there is a case for avoiding sloppy "good enough" programming
> practices:-) Alas, as you point out, "atoi" is widely used. I'm campaining
> to avoid adding more of them. There has been some push to actually remove
> "atoi" when not appropriate, eg from "libpq". I'd suggest to consider
> starting doing the right thing, and left fixing old patterns to another
> patch.
>
>

at least for processing user argument i think it is better to use strtol or
other
function that have better error handling. i can make a patch that change
usage
of atoi for user argument processing after getting feedback from here or i
will do
simultaneously

regards
Surafel