Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2017 14:57:08 -0300
From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>,
	pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: GCC 7 warnings
Message-ID: <20170411175708.coshtfzejgaqhar2@alvherre.pgsql>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <14447.1491841559@sss.pgh.pa.us>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170206-195-7adf12 (1.7.2)
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org

Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com> writes:

> > d) Replace most of the problematic code with psprintf() and dynamically
> > sized buffers.
> 
> +1 for (c) as you have it.  Later we might think about selectively
> doing (d), but it seems like more work for probably not much benefit.

Yeah -- also it's possible some of these code paths must not attempt to
palloc() for robustness reasons.  I would go for c) only for now, and
only try d) for very specific cases where there are no such concerns.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera                https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers