On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 07:21, Fujii Masao <masao.fu...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 8:53 AM, Euler Taveira de Oliveira > <eu...@timbira.com> wrote: >> On 25-02-2012 09:23, Magnus Hagander wrote: >>> Do we even *need* the validate_xlog_location() function? If we just >>> remove those calls, won't we still catch all the incorrectly formatted >>> ones in the errors of the sscanf() calls? Or am I too deep into >>> weekend-mode and missing something obvious? >>> >> sscanf() is too fragile for input sanity check. Try >> pg_xlog_location_diff('12/3', '-10/0'), for example. I won't object removing >> that function if you protect xlog location input from silly users. > > After this patch will have been committed, it would be better to change > pg_xlogfile_name() and pg_xlogfile_name_offset() so that they use > the validate_xlog_location() function to validate the input.
And I've done this part as well. -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/ -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers