From: Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>
To: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us
Subject: Re: Decision by Monday: PQescapeString() vs. encoding violation
Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2025 12:52:09 -0800
Message-ID: <4b911b554c42dee9e76bea1dbb14b4748015c1d5.camel@j-davis.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5paqlw7soc66ud5ny3uq27qeeufo2pcm276rvv75hjhvns2sme@bvbqnxivxb2m>
References: <20250215012712.45@rfd.leadboat.com>
<186954494c6b0bf643b1aa42fc67e9e25386ebe0.camel@j-davis.com>
<5paqlw7soc66ud5ny3uq27qeeufo2pcm276rvv75hjhvns2sme@bvbqnxivxb2m>
On Sat, 2025-02-15 at 15:43 -0500, Andres Freund wrote:
> It seems completely infeasible to me to to implement the "single
> error"
> approach in a minor version.
+1, keep with the behavior in the proposed patches.
Even in the next major version, I'd be inclined to try to move toward
interfaces that can produce an error reliably rather than spending more
time trying to use a "better" pattern of invalid bytes.
I just wanted to point out that some kind of decision was made and link
to relevant background information.
Regards,
Jeff Davis
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: pgsql@j-davis.com, andres@anarazel.de, noah@leadboat.com, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us
Subject: Re: Decision by Monday: PQescapeString() vs. encoding violation
In-Reply-To: <4b911b554c42dee9e76bea1dbb14b4748015c1d5.camel@j-davis.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox