| From: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Jim Vanns <james(dot)vanns(at)framestore(dot)com>, Dmitriy Igrishin <dmitigr(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Bug in libpq implentation and omission in documentation? |
| Date: | 2012-08-08 11:32:47 |
| Message-ID: | CABUevEwiLyAP0MeE8qsis1CcJWmJ2OvfiW+6qet0WCmzzbMKyg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:24 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
<heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> On 08.08.2012 12:36, Jim Vanns wrote:
>>
>> Ah ha. Yes, you're correct. It does mention here that an Int16 is used
>> to specify the number of parameter format codes, values etc.
>>
>> I suggest then that the documentation is updated to reflect this? Anf
>> again, perhaps the 'int' for nParams should be an int16_t or short?
>
>
> I don't think we should change the function signature for this, but I think
> a sanity check for "nParams < 32768" in libpq would be in order.
+1 - and also a clear update to the documentation.
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kevin Grittner | 2012-08-08 14:26:41 | Re: WIP fix proposal for bug #6123 |
| Previous Message | Jim Vanns | 2012-08-08 11:31:09 | Re: Bug in libpq implentation and omission in documentation? |