Re: BUG #1671: Long interval string representation rejected - Mailing list pgsql-bugs

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: BUG #1671: Long interval string representation rejected
Date
Msg-id 28185.1116473069@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: BUG #1671: Long interval string representation rejected  (Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com>)
Responses Re: BUG #1671: Long interval string representation rejected  (Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com>)
List pgsql-bugs
Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> There are a lot of fixed-size local buffers in that code.  The ones
>> used in output routines seem defensible since the string to be generated
>> is predictable.  The ones that are used for processing input are likely
>> wrong.

> I'm not sure offhand what the upper bounds on legal input for each of
> the datetime types is.

Well, if you allow for whitespace between tokens then it's immediately
clear that there is no fixed upper bound.  Perhaps it would work to
downcase just one token at a time, so that the max buffer length equals
the max acceptable token?

            regards, tom lane

pgsql-bugs by date:

Previous
From: Neil Conway
Date:
Subject: Re: Fw: Error when install
Next
From: Neil Conway
Date:
Subject: Re: BUG #1671: Long interval string representation rejected