On 09/10/2014 02:26 PM, Marko Tiikkaja wrote:
On 9/9/14 11:01 AM, I wrote:
On 9/9/14 10:54 AM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
So I think this (and the corresponding dearmor code too) should be
refactored to use a StringInfo that gets enlarged as needed, instead of
hoping to guess the size correctly beforehand. To ease review, might
make sense to do that as a separate patch over current sources, and the
main patch on top of that.
Yeah, I thought the same thing while writing that code. Thanks, I'll do
it that way.
Attached is what I have right now. I started working on the decoding
part, but it has this piece of code:
/* decode crc */
if (b64_decode(p + 1, 4, buf) != 3)
goto out;
which makes the approach a bit uglier. If I did this the same way, I
would have to create and destroy a StringInfo just for this operation,
which seems ugly. So I wonder if I shouldn't try and instead keep the
code closer to what it is in HEAD right now; I could call
enlargeStringInfo() first, then hand out a pointer to b64_encode (or
b64_decode()) and finally increment StringInfoData.len by how much was
actually written. That would keep the code changes a lot smaller, too.
Yeah, that sounds reasonable.
I'm also not sure why we need to keep a copy of the base64
encoding/decoding logic instead of exporting it in utils/adt/encode.c.
Good question...
- Heikki
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
