Re: generic builtin functions
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: generic builtin functions |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 24969.1134076786@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: generic builtin functions (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: generic builtin functions
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes: > Still thinking a bit more about this ... how about we have output > functions take an optional second argument, which is the type oid? No. We just undid that for good and sufficient security reasons. If an output function depends on anything more than the contents of the object it's handed, it's vulnerable to being lied to. http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2005-04/msg00998.php I realize that being told the wrong type ID might be less than catastrophic for enum_out, but I'm going to fiercely resist putting back any extra arguments for output functions. The temptation to use them unsafely is just too strong --- we've learned that the hard way more than once already, and I don't want to repeat the same mistake yet again. > Input funcs get a typioparam and typmod argument in addition to the > data value, Entirely different situation because the only thing an input function assumes is that it's been handed some text ... which it can validate. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: