Re: Why the asprintf patch is still breaking the buildfarm

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Manlio Perillo <manlio(dot)perillo(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Why the asprintf patch is still breaking the buildfarm
Date: 2013-10-23 13:47:26
Message-ID: 26677.1382536046@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 4:00 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> Yeah. As a separate matter, it might be useful to revise stringinfo.c
>> and the asprintf code so that *if* the returned value is larger than the
>> given buffer size, we use it as a guide to resizing, avoiding the possible
>> need to loop multiple times to make the buffer large enough. And we could
>> also improve our own implementation of snprintf to follow the C99 spec.

> Attached is a draft patch which implements this.

I started working on a very similar patch last night, but then began to
wonder if it wouldn't be better to try to share code between stringinfo.c
and psprintf.c --- that is, expose the latter's pvsnprintf and use that
in stringinfo.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Sameer Kumar 2013-10-23 14:43:34 Using indexes for ORDER BY and PARTITION BY clause in windowing functions
Previous Message Tom Lane 2013-10-23 12:53:34 Re: Why the asprintf patch is still breaking the buildfarm