Re: postgres_fdw - should we tighten up batch_size, fetch_size options against non-numeric values?

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Ashutosh Bapat
Тема Re: postgres_fdw - should we tighten up batch_size, fetch_size options against non-numeric values?
Дата
Msg-id CAExHW5tTsVwrTORJmix-=41a_KeN2NSaN9hdvvrqANqrKCYpHQ@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на postgres_fdw - should we tighten up batch_size, fetch_size options against non-numeric values?  (Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: postgres_fdw - should we tighten up batch_size, fetch_size options against non-numeric values?  (Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 3:29 PM Bharath Rupireddy
<bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> It looks like the values such as '123.456', '789.123' '100$%$#$#',
> '9,223,372,' are accepted and treated as valid integers for
> postgres_fdw options batch_size and fetch_size. Whereas this is not
> the case with fdw_startup_cost and fdw_tuple_cost options for which an
> error is thrown. Attaching a patch to fix that.

This looks like a definite improvement. I wonder if we should modify
defGetInt variants to convert strings into integers, so that there's
consistent error message for such errors. We could define defGetUInt
so that we could mention non-negative in the error message. Whether or
not we do that, this looks good.




-- 
Best Wishes,
Ashutosh Bapat



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: "osumi.takamichi@fujitsu.com"
Дата:
Сообщение: RE: Forget close an open relation in ReorderBufferProcessTXN()
Следующее
От: Andrew Dunstan
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Winflex docs and distro