On Tuesday 05 May 2009 03:01:05 Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
> > On Tuesday 14 April 2009 21:34:51 Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> >> I think we can handle that and the cases Tom presents by erroring out
> >> when the U& syntax is used with stdstr off.
> >
> > Proposed patch for that attached.
>
> I have not been able to think of any security hole in that proposal,
> so this patch seems acceptable to me. I wonder though whether any
> corresponding change is needed in psql's lexer, and if so how should
> it react exactly to the rejection case.
I had thought about that as well, but concluded that no additional change is
necessary.
Note that the *corresponding* change would be psql complaining "I don't like
what you entered", versus the just-committed behavior that psql is indifferent
and the server complains "I don't like what you sent me".
In any case, the point of the change is to prevent confusion in client
programs, so if we had to patch psql to make sense, then the change would have
been pointless in the first place.