On 12/23/2016 12:44 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > I wrote: >> So what to do? We could run around and fix these individual cases >> and call it good, but if we do, I will bet a very fine dinner that >> more such errors will sneak in before long. Seems like we need a >> coding convention that discourages just randomly treating a C string >> as a valid value of type NAME. Not sure how to get there though. > > An alternative worth considering, especially for the back branches, > is simply to remove the Assert in hashname(). That would give us > the behavior that non-developers see anyway, which is that these > functions always fail to match overlength names, whether or not > the names would have matched after truncation. Trying to apply > truncation more consistently could be left as an improvement > project for later.
That sounds reasonable to me. Joe -- Crunchy Data - http://crunchydata.com PostgreSQL Support for Secure Enterprises Consulting, Training, & Open Source Development
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
