Re: BUG #1671: Long interval string representation rejected

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: BUG #1671: Long interval string representation rejected
Дата
Msg-id 17757.1116396246@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: BUG #1671: Long interval string representation rejected  (Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com>)
Ответы Re: BUG #1671: Long interval string representation rejected  (Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com>)
Список pgsql-bugs
Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com> writes:
> Yeah, this seems bogus. It's not even clear to me why MAXDATELEN +
> MAXDATEFIELDS is used as the size of that buffer in the first place. I
> don't know the datetime code particularly well; perhaps someone who does
> can shed some light on this?

My rule of thumb with the datetime code is that if it looks bogus,
it probably is :-(

There are a lot of fixed-size local buffers in that code.  The ones
used in output routines seem defensible since the string to be generated
is predictable.  The ones that are used for processing input are likely
wrong.  OTOH I'm not eager to throw a palloc into each of those code
paths ... can we avoid that?

            regards, tom lane

В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Neil Conway
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: BUG #1671: Long interval string representation rejected
Следующее
От: Michael Fuhr
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: BUG #1672: Postgres 8.0 doesn't return errors.