Re: pgsql: Code and docs review for multiple -c and -f options in psql.

From: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-committers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pgsql: Code and docs review for multiple -c and -f options in psql.
Date: 2015-12-14 02:16:04
Message-ID: CAB7nPqStBL6=Afs2J1zD+YurHnSnK6mgXbprUo5RBq0SRNP63A@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-committers

On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 4:52 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Code and docs review for multiple -c and -f options in psql.
>
> Commit d5563d7df94488bf drew complaints from Coverity, which quite
> correctly complained that one copy of each -c or -f string was being
> leaked. What's more, simple_action_list_append was allocating enough space
> for still a third copy of each string as part of the SimpleActionListCell,
> even though that coding method had been superseded by a separate strdup
> operation. There were some other minor coding infelicities too. The
> documentation needed more work as well, eg it forgot to explain that -c
> causes psql not to accept any interactive input.

- cell = (SimpleActionListCell *)
- pg_malloc(offsetof(SimpleActionListCell, val) + vallen + 1);
Thanks! Among all those things this bit is a bit shameful..
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-committers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2015-12-14 02:16:39 Re: pgsql: Code and docs review for multiple -c and -f options in psql.
Previous Message Tom Lane 2015-12-13 19:52:13 pgsql: Code and docs review for multiple -c and -f options in psql.