| From: | "Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn(at)amazon(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Alexander Kukushkin <cyberdemn(at)gmail(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, "isaac(dot)morland(at)gmail(dot)com" <isaac(dot)morland(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Maximum password length |
| Date: | 2020-09-03 20:06:55 |
| Message-ID: | E2E734F7-0C49-472B-865D-4901DCC0041B@amazon.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 9/3/20, 10:19 AM, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Hearing no objections to this general plan, I went ahead and did that
> cleanup. This version seems committable to me.
FILE *pwf = fopen(pwfilename, "r");
- int i;
+ char pwdbuf[8192];
If I am reading correctly, this would be the only defined password
length limit once this patch is applied. While it's probably unlikely
that this will cause problems for anybody anytime soon, is there any
reason not to give this the same treatment as the .pgpass code and
remove the line length limit altogether?
Otherwise, the patch looks good to me.
Nathan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2020-09-03 20:08:42 | Re: proposal: possibility to read dumped table's name from file |
| Previous Message | Andreas Karlsson | 2020-09-03 19:59:55 | Re: INSERT ON CONFLICT and RETURNING |