Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > Attached is a more refined patch that I propose for PG10 now. Compared > to the previous rushed version, this one uses some more precise > arithmetic to size some of the buffers.
Generally +1 for switching the snprintf calls to use sizeof() rather than repeating the declared sizes of the arrays. The change in setup_formatted_log_time seems a bit weird: - char msbuf[8]; + char msbuf[10]; The associated call is sprintf(msbuf, ".%03d", (int) (saved_timeval.tv_usec / 1000)); Now a human can see that saved_timeval.tv_usec must be 0..999999, so that the %d format item must always emit exactly 3 characters, which means that really 5 bytes would be enough. I wouldn't expect a compiler to know that, but if it's making a generic assumption about the worst-case width of %d, shouldn't it conclude that we might need as many as 13 bytes for the buffer? Why does msbuf[10] satisfy it if msbuf[8] doesn't? IOW, if we're going to touch this at all, I'd be inclined to go with msbuf[16] or so, as being more likely to satisfy compilers that have decided to try to warn about this. And maybe we should use snprintf, just for luck. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers