Re: invalidly encoded strings
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: invalidly encoded strings |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 16212.1189394546@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: invalidly encoded strings (Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: invalidly encoded strings
Re: invalidly encoded strings |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com> writes: > Would stringTypeDatum() in parse_type.c be a good place to put the > pg_verifymbstr()? Probably not, in its current form, since it hasn't got any idea where the "char *string" came from; moreover it is not in any better position than the typinput function to determine whether there was a bogus embedded null. OTOH, there may be no decent way to fix the embedded-null problem other than by hacking the scanner to reject \0 immediately. If we did that it would give us more flexibility about where to put the encoding validity checks. In any case, I feel dubious that checking in stringTypeDatum will cover every code path. Somewhere around where A_Const gets transformed to Const seems like it'd be a better plan. (But I think that in most utility statement parsetrees, A_Const never does get transformed to Const; and there seem to be a few places in gram.y where an SCONST gives rise to something other than A_Const; so this is still not a bulletproof choice, at least not without additional changes.) In the short run it might be best to do it in scan.l after all. A few minutes' thought about what it'd take to delay the decisions till later yields a depressingly large number of changes; and we do not have time to be developing mostly-cosmetic patches for 8.3. Given that database_encoding is frozen for any one DB at the moment, and that that is unlikely to change in the near future, insisting on a solution that allows it to vary is probably unreasonable at this stage of the game. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: