On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 4:13 PM, Noah Misch <n...@leadboat.com> wrote:
> I share your (Kevin's) discomfort with our use of strlcpy(). I wouldn't
> someone replacing most strlcpy()/snprintf() calls with calls to wrappers
> ereport(ERROR) on truncation. Though as reliability problems go, this one
> been minor.
Or maybe it would be better to just remove the restriction and just palloc
something of the correct size?
Although, that sounds like a much larger patch. I'd vote that the strlcpy
should be used in the meantime.