Re: postgres_fdw - should we tighten up batch_size, fetch_size options against non-numeric values? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Fujii Masao
Subject Re: postgres_fdw - should we tighten up batch_size, fetch_size options against non-numeric values?
Date
Msg-id 24091124-c4ec-f0a9-7ba6-29b8aa6c5cd5@oss.nttdata.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to postgres_fdw - should we tighten up batch_size, fetch_size options against non-numeric values?  (Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: postgres_fdw - should we tighten up batch_size, fetch_size options against non-numeric values?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers

On 2021/05/17 18:58, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> It looks like the values such as '123.456', '789.123' '100$%$#$#',
> '9,223,372,' are accepted and treated as valid integers for
> postgres_fdw options batch_size and fetch_size. Whereas this is not
> the case with fdw_startup_cost and fdw_tuple_cost options for which an
> error is thrown. Attaching a patch to fix that.

This looks an improvement. But one issue is that the restore of
dump file taken by pg_dump from v13 may fail for v14 with this patch
if it contains invalid setting of fetch_size, e.g., "fetch_size '123.456'".
OTOH, since batch_size was added in v14, it has no such issue.

Regards,

-- 
Fujii Masao
Advanced Computing Technology Center
Research and Development Headquarters
NTT DATA CORPORATION



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Ashutosh Bapat
Date:
Subject: Re: postgres_fdw - should we tighten up batch_size, fetch_size options against non-numeric values?
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: postgres_fdw - should we tighten up batch_size, fetch_size options against non-numeric values?