From: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)justatheory(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Bad Data back Door |
Date: | 2012-10-06 17:34:36 |
Message-ID: | A1176DA3-B32B-4396-A820-78E7CF9C9C0F@justatheory.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Oct 5, 2012, at 6:12 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Probably not so much "assumed" as "nobody thought about it". In
> e.g. plperl we expend the cycles to do encoding validity checking on
> *every* string entering the system from Perl. I'm not sure why foreign
> tables ought to get a pass on that, especially when you consider the
> communication overhead that the encoding check would be amortized
> against.
Yes, that’s what I was thinking.
> Now, having said that, I think it has to be the reponsibility of the FDW
> to apply any required check ... which makes this a bug report against
> oracle_fdw, not the core system. (FWIW, contrib/file_fdw depends on the
> COPY code, which will check encoding.)
I agree that this is a bug in oracle_fdw (well, potentially; ultimately, it’s Oracle that’s lying about the encoding of those text values). But I think that it would be much more useful overall -- not to mention more database-like -- for PostgreSQL to provide a way to enforce it. That is, to consider foreign tables to be an input like COPY or SQL, and to validate values before displaying them.
Best,
David
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Atri Sharma | 2012-10-06 17:37:02 | Re: Bad Data back Door |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2012-10-06 14:59:47 | Re: Add FET to Default and Europe.txt |