Re: [HACKERS] Small patch for pg_basebackup argument parsing

On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 2:32 AM, Pierre Ducroquet <p.psql@pinaraf.info> wrote:
> On Friday, April 14, 2017 8:44:37 AM CEST Michael Paquier wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 6:32 AM, Pierre Ducroquet <p.psql@pinaraf.info>
> wrote:
>> > Yesterday while doing a few pg_basebackup, I realized that the integer
>> > parameters were not properly checked against invalid input.
>> > It is not a critical issue, but this could be misleading for an user who
>> > writes -z max or -s 0.5…
>> > I've attached the patch to this mail. Should I add it to the next commit
>> > fest or is it not needed for such small patches ?
>>
>> A call to atoi is actually equivalent to strtol with the rounding:
>> (int)strtol(str, (char **)NULL, 10);
>> So I don't think this is worth caring.
>
> The problem with atoi is that it simply ignores any invalid input and returns
> 0 instead.
> That's why I did this patch, because I did a typo when calling pg_basebackup
> and was not warned for an invalid input.

I agree.  I think it would be worth going through and cleaning up
every instance of this in the source tree.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company