Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1m3N6v-0001JE-Is for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Tue, 13 Jul 2021 18:26:25 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1m3N6u-0001zi-IM for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Tue, 13 Jul 2021 18:26:24 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1m3N6u-0001zZ-AK for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Tue, 13 Jul 2021 18:26:24 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1m3N6s-00016u-AX for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Tue, 13 Jul 2021 18:26:23 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 16DIQI2b3280449; Tue, 13 Jul 2021 14:26:19 -0400 From: Tom Lane To: Ranier Vilela cc: Laurenz Albe , PostgreSQL Hackers Subject: Re: printf %s with NULL pointer (was Re: BUG #17098: Assert failed on composing an error message when adding a type to an extension being dropped) In-reply-to: References: <17098-b960f3616c861f83@postgresql.org> <2468663.1626017338@sss.pgh.pa.us> <2984422.1626110456@sss.pgh.pa.us> <3227956.1626186568@sss.pgh.pa.us> Comments: In-reply-to Ranier Vilela message dated "Tue, 13 Jul 2021 15:04:19 -0300" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-ID: <3280447.1626200778.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2021 14:26:18 -0400 Message-ID: <3280448.1626200778@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Archived-At: Precedence: bulk Ranier Vilela writes: > Em ter., 13 de jul. de 2021 =C3=A0s 11:29, Tom Lane = escreveu: >> I think you're missing my main point, which is that it seems certain th= at >> there are corner cases that do this *now*. I'm proposing that we redef= ine >> this as not being a crash case, full stop. > I agree with Laurenz Albe, that on Debug builds, *printf with NULL, must > crash. Did you see my followup? The vast majority of live systems do not do that, so we are accomplishing nothing of value by insisting it's a crash-worthy bug. I flat out don't agree that "crash on debug builds but it's okay on production" is a useful way to define this. I spend way too much time already on bug reports that only manifest with asserts enabled. regards, tom lane