Re: timetz range check issue - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: timetz range check issue
Date
Msg-id 17025.1198300572@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to timetz range check issue  (Andrew Chernow <ac@esilo.com>)
Responses Re: timetz range check issue  (Andrew Chernow <ac@esilo.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Andrew Chernow <ac@esilo.com> writes:
> I think a range check is needed in timetz_recv & time_recv.

I think that the design philosophy for the binary I/O code is to be as
fast as safely possible, and accordingly range-checks are present only
where needed for the backend to defend itself.  Is there anything that
goes horribly wrong if a client shoves a bad zone offset at us?

(If we want to change this philosophy, I won't necessarily quibble,
but I don't think these two recv routines are the only ones that
would need to be tightened up.)
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: pgsql: Improve wording.
Next
From: "Francisco"
Date:
Subject: binary decode