From: | Pierre Ducroquet <p(dot)psql(at)pinaraf(dot)info> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Small patch for pg_basebackup argument parsing |
Date: | 2017-04-14 06:32:54 |
Message-ID: | 4118888.2l8e7bj9bN@peanuts2 |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Friday, April 14, 2017 8:44:37 AM CEST Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 6:32 AM, Pierre Ducroquet <p(dot)psql(at)pinaraf(dot)info>
wrote:
> > Yesterday while doing a few pg_basebackup, I realized that the integer
> > parameters were not properly checked against invalid input.
> > It is not a critical issue, but this could be misleading for an user who
> > writes -z max or -s 0.5…
> > I've attached the patch to this mail. Should I add it to the next commit
> > fest or is it not needed for such small patches ?
>
> A call to atoi is actually equivalent to strtol with the rounding:
> (int)strtol(str, (char **)NULL, 10);
> So I don't think this is worth caring.
The problem with atoi is that it simply ignores any invalid input and returns
0 instead.
That's why I did this patch, because I did a typo when calling pg_basebackup
and was not warned for an invalid input.
But it doesn't matter that much, so if you don't think that's interesting, no
problem.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Amit Langote | 2017-04-14 07:13:06 | Minor typo in partition.c |
Previous Message | Kyotaro HORIGUCHI | 2017-04-14 06:09:35 | Re: Interval for launching the table sync worker |