Re: Numeric is not leakproof

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Konstantin Knizhnik <k(dot)knizhnik(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>
Cc: pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Numeric is not leakproof
Date: 2019-11-28 15:21:40
Message-ID: 32453.1574954500@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs

Konstantin Knizhnik <k(dot)knizhnik(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> writes:
> Numeric functions are not marked as leakproof in pg_proc.dat

Indeed. Nobody has done the analysis needed to decide that it'd be safe
to do so. For comparison, see the rather considerable discussion that
occurred before marking the text comparison functions leakproof.

> But it seems to me that it may be reasonable to mark ALL builtin
> functions (described in pg_proc.dat) as leekprof by default.

This proposal is risible. But if you actually need a counterexample,
here's one:

regression=# select 'abc' ~ '(foo';
ERROR: invalid regular expression: parentheses () not balanced

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2019-11-28 18:26:33 Re: BUG #16140: View with INSERT, DO INSTEAD, and ON CONFLICT causes an error
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2019-11-28 13:09:22 Re: BUG #16125: Crash of PostgreSQL's wal sender during logical replication