Re: Incorrect usage of strtol, atoi for non-numeric junk inputs

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Incorrect usage of strtol, atoi for non-numeric junk inputs
Date: 2021-07-22 05:32:35
Message-ID: YPkC828cQ8SMkMjI@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Jul 22, 2021 at 01:19:41AM +1200, David Rowley wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Jul 2021 at 00:44, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 22, 2021 at 12:32:39AM +1200, David Rowley wrote:
>> > I see both of these are limited to 64 on windows. Won't those fail on Windows?
>>
>> Yes, thanks, they would. I would just cut the range numbers from the
>> expected output here. This does not matter in terms of coverage
>> either.
>
> Sounds good.
>
>> x> I also wondered if it would be worth doing #define MAX_JOBS somewhere
>> > away from the option parsing code. This part is pretty ugly:
>>
>> Agreed as well. pg_dump and pg_restore have their own idea of
>> parallelism in parallel.{c.h}. What about putting MAX_JOBS in
>> parallel.h then?
>
> parallel.h looks ok to me.

Okay, done those parts as per the attached. While on it, I noticed an
extra one for pg_dump --rows-per-insert. I am counting 25 translated
strings cut in total.

Any objections to this first step?
--
Michael

Attachment Content-Type Size
v5-0001-Introduce-and-use-routine-for-parsing-of-int32-op.patch text/x-diff 25.9 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Fabien COELHO 2021-07-22 05:52:02 Re: psql - add SHOW_ALL_RESULTS option
Previous Message vignesh C 2021-07-22 05:28:12 Re: Automatic notification of top transaction IDs