Re: BUG #18711: Attempting a connection with a database name longer than 63 characters now fails

From: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, adam(at)labkey(dot)com, pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: BUG #18711: Attempting a connection with a database name longer than 63 characters now fails
Date: 2024-11-22 20:17:07
Message-ID: Z0Dmw1ryKH8bEkyo@nathan
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs

On Fri, Nov 22, 2024 at 03:07:46PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> I think we'll also want to do something about MyProcPort->database_name
>
> Huh, isn't that getting filled from InitPostgres's out_dbname?

I think ProcessStartupPacket() sets it. That's called by
BackendInitialize(), which is called before PostgresMain() (which is what
ultimately calls InitPostgres()). The truncation used to happen within
ProcessStartupPacket(), and it updated MyProcPort directly.

--
nathan

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message PG Bug reporting form 2024-11-23 00:52:56 BUG #18720: Can not install
Previous Message Tom Lane 2024-11-22 20:07:46 Re: BUG #18711: Attempting a connection with a database name longer than 63 characters now fails