Re: BUG #13960: plpython fails with certain function names

From: Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)BlueTreble(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: <pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: BUG #13960: plpython fails with certain function names
Date: 2016-02-17 01:53:22
Message-ID: 56C3D292.9060507@BlueTreble.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs

On 2/16/16 7:49 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> I like the idea of replacing invalid characters with '_'. It's definitely
> not safe to scribble on the pg_proc tuple, but we could get the same
> result with a few wasted cycles by rescanning the procName string after
> building it, as per attached.

Heck, I didn't even think about that. Yeah, it's going to scan another
20 bytes or so, but this certainly isn't performance critical.

BTW, I didn't bother checking this with python 3.5, but I can't fathom
how that would matter here.
--
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting, Austin TX
Experts in Analytics, Data Architecture and PostgreSQL
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2016-02-17 02:09:10 Re: BUG #13960: plpython fails with certain function names
Previous Message Tom Lane 2016-02-17 01:49:38 Re: BUG #13960: plpython fails with certain function names