From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: minor auth code cleanup |
Date: | 2002-08-27 15:16:37 |
Message-ID: | 200208271516.g7RFGb224820@candle.pha.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-patches |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> writes:
> >> There may be existing clients out there that miscompute the password
> >> packet length. Right now that does no harm. With an Assert in place
> >> in the backend, it will cause a database system restart.
>
> > Good point. However, I still think a sanity check would be appropriate
> > here. How about an elog(WARNING) ?
>
> I think that elog(LOG) is probably the right thing. IIRC, at that point
> in startup we will not send anything short of ERROR to the client, so
> elog(WARNING) is pointless from the client's point of view --- and a LOG
> is actually more likely to get into the server's log than a WARNING.
Agreed. I did not add any of that code. The actual place you were
testing was not the startup packet but the password packet.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Neil Conway | 2002-08-27 16:13:39 | Re: minor auth code cleanup |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-08-27 15:15:46 | Re: minor auth code cleanup |