Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.191])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2C999F96E0
	for <pgsql-hackers-postgresql.org@postgresql.org>;
	Mon,  3 Sep 2007 21:02:15 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71])
	by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.191]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 28771-02 for
	<pgsql-hackers-postgresql.org@postgresql.org>;
	Mon,  3 Sep 2007 21:02:10 -0300 (ADT)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.5
Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6DC559F96D0
	for <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>;
	Mon,  3 Sep 2007 21:02:11 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l8401mpQ005360;
	Mon, 3 Sep 2007 20:01:48 -0400 (EDT)
To: "Ben Tilly" <btilly@gmail.com>
cc: "Gregory Stark" <stark@enterprisedb.com>,
	"Magnus Hagander" <magnus@hagander.net>, "Oleg Bartunov" <oleg@sai.msu.su>,
	"Pavel Stehule" <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>,
	"PostgreSQL Hackers" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: tsearch filenames unlikes special symbols and numbers 
In-reply-to: <acc274b30709031654wf337c8fp79c93fea9f1c3328@mail.gmail.com> 
References: <162867790709021328i7771aa9jfe79268bccbf123d@mail.gmail.com>
	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0709030113090.2767@sn.sai.msu.ru>
	<18259.1188773171@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<87y7foir7t.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com>
	<19257.1188777110@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<87tzqci6tp.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com>
	<20070903075609.GD21833@svr2.hagander.net>
	<1692.1188826039@sss.pgh.pa.us> <87zm03zwqs.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com>
	<8195.1188828543@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<acc274b30709031654wf337c8fp79c93fea9f1c3328@mail.gmail.com>
Comments: In-reply-to "Ben Tilly" <btilly@gmail.com>
	message dated "Mon, 03 Sep 2007 16:54:00 -0700"
Date: Mon, 03 Sep 2007 20:01:48 -0400
Message-ID: <5359.1188864108@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1
X-Archive-Number: 200709/111
X-Sequence-Number: 107263

"Ben Tilly" <btilly@gmail.com> writes:
> I don't know what you're discussing well enough to know if this is
> relevant, but what you just said is not always true.  If there is any
> way to pass arbitrary binary data into your function call, then
> someone can pass in a string with nul in it.

Not a problem here, because the passed-in data is considered
nul-terminated already.  (Sometimes, not being 8-bit-clean is
an advantage...)

			regards, tom lane