| 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: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | 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 |