> On Nov 10, 2025, at 18:27, Xuneng Zhou wrote:
>
> Hi Michael, Chao,
>
> On Mon, Nov 10, 2025 at 11:32 AM Michael Paquier wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 10, 2025 at 10:30:31AM +0800, Chao Li wrote:
>>> Is really confused. The error message says “maximum of 64”, but the
>>> test right uses a name
Hi,
On Wed, Nov 12, 2025 at 9:37 AM Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 10, 2025 at 06:27:41PM +0800, Xuneng Zhou wrote:
> > Thanks for the patch. I also agree with Chao's suggestion that the
> > error message better reflects the actual character limits. I
> > implemented a patch for that and
On Mon, Nov 10, 2025 at 06:27:41PM +0800, Xuneng Zhou wrote:
> Thanks for the patch. I also agree with Chao's suggestion that the
> error message better reflects the actual character limits. I
> implemented a patch for that and updated the test patch as well.
> Please check.
The restriction relate
On Mon, Nov 10, 2025 at 06:27:41PM +0800, Xuneng Zhou wrote:
> Thanks for the patch. I also agree with Chao's suggestion that the
> error message better reflects the actual character limits. I
> implemented a patch for that and updated the test patch as well.
> Please check.
Yes, that works here.
> On 10 Nov 2025, at 02:11, Michael Paquier wrote:
> While looking at a recent patch for injection points that has resulted
> in 16a2f706951e, I have been reminded that the point name, library
> name and function name have hardcoded limits, and it is now possible
> to have them tested by SQL.
Wh
Hi Michael, Chao,
On Mon, Nov 10, 2025 at 11:32 AM Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 10, 2025 at 10:30:31AM +0800, Chao Li wrote:
> > Is really confused. The error message says “maximum of 64”, but the
> > test right uses a name of length 64. I know that the tricky is the
> > ‘\0’ terminator
On Mon, Nov 10, 2025 at 10:30:31AM +0800, Chao Li wrote:
> Is really confused. The error message says “maximum of 64”, but the
> test right uses a name of length 64. I know that the tricky is the
> ‘\0’ terminator, but should SQL writer have to keep mind about the
> ‘\0’ terminator? Should they jus
> On Nov 10, 2025, at 09:11, Michael Paquier wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> While looking at a recent patch for injection points that has resulted
> in 16a2f706951e, I have been reminded that the point name, library
> name and function name have hardcoded limits, and it is now possible
> to have them
Hi all,
While looking at a recent patch for injection points that has resulted
in 16a2f706951e, I have been reminded that the point name, library
name and function name have hardcoded limits, and it is now possible
to have them tested by SQL.
Attached is a patch to do so. Thoughts?
--
Michael
Fr
