Re: Reject invalid databases in pg_get_database_ddl()
| От | Andrew Dunstan |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Reject invalid databases in pg_get_database_ddl() |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 4f0d336f-3de6-4671-b7d2-b7d8e3cbf790@dunslane.net обсуждение |
| Ответ на | Re: Reject invalid databases in pg_get_database_ddl() (Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com>) |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2026-04-17 Fr 12:22 AM, Amit Langote wrote: > On Fri, Apr 17, 2026 at 1:21 PM Lakshmi N <lakshmin.jhs@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Thu, Apr 16, 2026 at 8:31 PM Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Fri, Apr 17, 2026 at 11:49 AM Hu Xunqi <huxunqi.08@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> On Fri, Apr 17, 2026 at 10:16 AM Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> + /* >>>> + * Reject invalid databases: datconnlimit = -2 would be emitted as >>>> + * CONNECTION LIMIT = -2, which cannot be executed. >>>> + */ >>>> >>>> This comment looks a bit too centered on datconnlimit=-2, but the real issue is that an invalid pg_database row shouldnot be deparsed into DDL. So, maybe rephrase like: >>>> >>>> /* >>>> * Reject invalid databases. Deparsing a pg_database row in invalid state >>>> * can produce SQL that is not executable, such as CONNECTION LIMIT = -2. >>>> */ >>> I was trying to be precise about datconnlimit = -2 being the thing >>> that produces invalid SQL. But your version covers that with the "such >>> as CONNECTION LIMIT = -2" example, and it's closer to the original, >>> which was on the right track, just needed to be more precise. Let's go >>> with it. >> This looks good to me. Thank you for reviewing and making the changes! > Pushed. > Thanks for jumping on this. cheers andrew -- Andrew Dunstan EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: