From: | "Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD" <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at> |
---|---|
To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | "Justin Clift" <justin(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>, "Vince Vielhaber" <vev(at)michvhf(dot)com>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: @(#) Mordred Labs advisory 0x0001: Buffer overflow in |
Date: | 2002-08-20 20:17:28 |
Message-ID: | 46C15C39FEB2C44BA555E356FBCD6FA4961E54@m0114.s-mxs.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> "Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD" <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at> writes:
> > Hard to say what is good for those names imho, don't like
> "anytype" :-(
>
> How about "any"? It's a reserved word per SQL99, I think.
I would actually stick to opaque in that case, already used in other db's.
> > I like "cstring", "void" and "internal".
>
> Okay.
>
> > Maybe "anyarray" instead of "anyarraytype".
>
> That would match with "any".
I thought you wanted it separate ?
>
> > And I would prefer "row" instead of "tuple".
>
> I'm leaning towards agreeing with Stephan: we should use typename
> "trigger" to declare triggers. "Tuple" (or "row") is strictly correct
> only for BEFORE triggers, not AFTER triggers, so it's a bit of a
> misnomer for triggers anyhow.
Convinced.
>
> I'm now also toying with inventing a pseudotype just for procedural
> language handlers, which are currently "foo() returns opaque". If we
> want the type system to catch misuses of trigger functions, we should
> want it for handlers too. Maybe name this type "language_handler"?
"HANDLER" would again already be a reserved word, sounds good.
Andreas
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2002-08-20 20:21:50 | Re: @(#) Mordred Labs advisory 0x0001: Buffer overflow in |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2002-08-20 20:15:01 | Re: @(#)Mordred Labs advisory 0x0003: Buffer overflow in PostgreSQL (fwd) |