From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Justin Clift <justin(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers Mailing List <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Interesting message about printf()'s in PostgreSQL |
Date: | 2002-08-12 04:05:36 |
Message-ID: | 27201.1029125136@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Justin Clift <justin(at)postgresql(dot)org> writes:
> Whilst looking around for some more PostgreSQL related stuff, this
> message turned up:
> http://mail.wirex.com/pipermail/sardonix/2002-February/000051.html
I see one unsubstantiated allegation about PG intermixed with a ton
of content-free navel-gazing. Don't waste my time.
There was some considerable effort awhile back towards eliminating
unsafe printfs in favor of snprintfs and similar constructs; I doubt
that the comments in that message postdate that effort.
I have no doubt that some problems remain (cf recent agonizing over
whether there is a buffer overrun problem in the date parser) ...
but unspecific rumors don't help anyone. As always, the best form of
criticism is a diff -c patch.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Gavin Sherry | 2002-08-12 04:10:05 | Re: Interesting message about printf()'s in PostgreSQL |
Previous Message | Justin Clift | 2002-08-12 03:36:55 | Interesting message about printf()'s in PostgreSQL |