Re: @(#) Mordred Labs advisory 0x0001: Buffer overflow in

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

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  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)