[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/XERCESC-1051?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12482712
 ] 

Christian Charbula commented on XERCESC-1051:
---------------------------------------------

Well, that's really a big problem to me.

Since I've to implement a solution which was given from the UNO, about 30 
goverments and some hundret credit instutes, it's really not possible to me to 
change the maxOccurs.
The maxOccurs is a very important limitation in this validation. (500 is to low 
by far)
It's not possible to set/overrule the maxOccurs to another value.

I need to use the Xerces-C++ parser, since it's also available for some 
'exotic'-operating systems. (like OpenVMS)

Please set a higher priority to this issue.
Why is there a recursion needed? Can't it be implemented in a counting solution?
Thanks,
Christian


> Crash when maxOccurs >= 200000
> ------------------------------
>
>                 Key: XERCESC-1051
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/XERCESC-1051
>             Project: Xerces-C++
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: Validating Parser (Schema) (Xerces 1.5 or up only)
>    Affects Versions: 2.3.0
>         Environment: Operating System: Windows NT/2K
> Platform: PC
>            Reporter: Frank Rast
>         Assigned To: Alberto Massari
>
> Parser crashes in ContentSpecNode.hpp: ContentSpecNode::~ContentSpecNode().
> Steps to reproduce:
> validate a xml file against a schema with an element having a maxOccurs >= 
> 200000.
> Assumed cause:
> Stack overfow
> Makeshift resolution:
> Set the repeat count to unbounded(-1), when maxOccurs > 500:
> inline void ContentSpecNode::setMaxOccurs(int max)
> {
>     if(max > 500) 
>         max = -1;
>     fMaxOccurs = max;
> }

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to