On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 4:13 AM, Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@commandprompt.com> wrote: > > Excerpts from Heikki Linnakangas's message of jue ene 26 15:58:58 -0300 2012: >> On 26.01.2012 17:31, Tom Lane wrote: > >> > The idea that occurs to me is to have the code that uses the GUC do a >> > verify_mbstr(noerror) on it, and silently ignore it if it doesn't pass >> > (maybe with a LOG message). This would have to be documented of course, >> > but it seems better than the potential consequences of trying to send a >> > wrongly-encoded string. >> >> Hmm, fine with me. It would be nice to plug the hole that these bogus >> characters can leak elsewhere into the system through current_setting, >> though. Perhaps we could put the verify_mbstr() call somewhere in guc.c, >> to forbid incorrectly encoded characters from being stored in the guc >> variable in the first place. > > This patch is listed as "Needs review" but that seems to be wrong -- > it's "waiting on author", I think.
Yes. I marked the patch as "waiting on author". > Do we have an updated patch? Fujii? No. I believe that the author Jim will submit the updated version. Regards, -- Fujii Masao NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION NTT Open Source Software Center -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
