Re: PQconninfo function for libpq
От | Fujii Masao |
---|---|
Тема | Re: PQconninfo function for libpq |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAHGQGwG1aJZHyYUrMRc04QG-AMRBTweFhvVE0Y1CPxNSJBOAZg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: PQconninfo function for libpq (Boszormenyi Zoltan <zb@cybertec.at>) |
Ответы |
Re: PQconninfo function for libpq
Re: PQconninfo function for libpq |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 10:05 PM, Boszormenyi Zoltan <zb@cybertec.at> wrote: > 2012-11-22 12:44 keltezéssel, Magnus Hagander írta: >>>>>>> Also, a question was buried in the other review which is - are we OK >>>>>>> to remove the requiressl parameter. Both these patches do so, because >>>>>>> the code becomes much simpler if we can do that. It has been >>>>>>> deprecated since 7.2. Is it OK to remove it, or do we need to put >>>>>>> back >>>>>>> in the more complex code to deal with both? >>>>> >>>>> Just going to highlight that we're looking for at least one third >>>>> party to comment on this :) >>>> >>>> >>>> Yes, me too. A +1 for removing wouldn't count from me. ;-) +1 > The second one is the product of what caught my attention while > I was looking at pg_receivexlog. The current coding may write > beyond the end of the allocated arrays and the password may > overwrite a previously set keyword/value pair. ISTM that such problem doesn't happen at all because argcount is incremented as follows. if (dbhost) argcount++;if (dbuser) argcount++;if (dbport) argcount++; Regards, -- Fujii Masao
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: