回复:回复:回复:回复:回复:A question about leakproof
От | qiumingcheng |
---|---|
Тема | 回复:回复:回复:回复:回复:A question about leakproof |
Дата | |
Msg-id | eed0c0ec-09a1-4bd4-83a2-873af458ff9d.qiumingcheng@aliyun.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: 回复:回复:回复:回复:A question about leakproof (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-general |
OK, got it. Thank you very much.
------------------------------------------------------------------发件人:Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>发送时间:2022年10月18日(星期二) 00:27收件人:qiumingcheng <qiumingcheng@aliyun.com>抄 送:Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at>; Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123@gmail.com>; pgsql-general <pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org>; yuexingzhi <yuexingzhi@hotmail.com>主 题:Re: 回复:回复:回复:回复:A question about leakproof"qiumingcheng" <qiumingcheng@aliyun.com> writes:
> Yes, It's capable of throwing an error(timestamp out of range) , but the
> message "timestamp out of range" is not sensitive information.
Really? Whether that's true at all is a matter of opinion. There's
also the prospect that somebody could determine the value of a
supposedly-unreadable timestamp by seeing how big an interval could
be added to it without overflow. Maybe that's infeasible because of
timestamp_pl_interval not being marked leakproof, but then we're
getting into precisely the sort of conditional-on-other-assumptions
reasoning that we don't want to indulge in.
> Only from this function(timestamp_gt_timestamptz), can it be marked as leakproof?
Project policy is that we will not mark a function as leakproof unless
it's evident from the text of the function that it can't throw errors.
I don't see a good argument for making a exception for this one.
regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: