| From: | Jacob Champion <jchampion(at)timescale(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Log details for client certificate failures |
| Date: | 2022-07-20 22:11:10 |
| Message-ID: | CAAWbhmhGOh_1C6x1A8K5hsMuSeOF5hxQ4ZMGkFhqmVTZ0otzRQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Jul 19, 2022 at 3:38 PM Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> Or alternatively, perhaps we can just make pg_clean_ascii() return NULL
> if allocation failed and then guc_strdup() the result in guc.c?
The guc_strdup() approach really reduces the amount of code, so that's
what I did in v3. I'm not following why we need to return NULL on
failure, though -- both palloc() and guc_malloc() ERROR on failure, so
is it okay to keep those semantics the same?
> If we end up needing a two phase approach, why use the same function for
> both phases? That seems quite awkward.
Mostly so the byte counting always agrees between the two phases, no
matter how the implementation evolves. But it's hopefully moot now.
--Jacob
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| v3-0001-pg_clean_ascii-escape-bytes-rather-than-lose-them.patch | text/x-patch | 4.3 KB |
| v3-0002-Don-t-reflect-unescaped-cert-data-to-the-logs.patch | text/x-patch | 18.3 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2022-07-20 22:15:07 | Re: [PATCH] Log details for client certificate failures |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2022-07-20 20:32:46 | Re: System catalog documentation chapter |