Re: Small patch for pg_basebackup argument parsing

From: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Pierre Ducroquet <p(dot)psql(at)pinaraf(dot)info>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Small patch for pg_basebackup argument parsing
Date: 2017-04-13 23:44:37
Message-ID: CAB7nPqQOGLhGFW+1D=_WHLhaJLv+WafhHN-2n-vvo_K=Ds9-OA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 6:32 AM, Pierre Ducroquet <p(dot)psql(at)pinaraf(dot)info> wrote:
> Yesterday while doing a few pg_basebackup, I realized that the integer
> parameters were not properly checked against invalid input.
> It is not a critical issue, but this could be misleading for an user who
> writes -z max or -s 0.5…
> I've attached the patch to this mail. Should I add it to the next commit fest
> or is it not needed for such small patches ?

A call to atoi is actually equivalent to strtol with the rounding:
(int)strtol(str, (char **)NULL, 10);
So I don't think this is worth caring.

By doing a git grep "atoi(optarg)" you'll see far more places that
handle integer options this way as well...
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2017-04-14 00:03:06 Re: logical replication and PANIC during shutdown checkpoint in publisher
Previous Message Fabien COELHO 2017-04-13 22:58:50 Re: Undefined psql variables