Re: pg_amcheck: Fix block number parsing on command line - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Eisentraut
Subject Re: pg_amcheck: Fix block number parsing on command line
Date
Msg-id 84555066-c5ec-46f1-5bbd-e732eea86c1c@enterprisedb.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pg_amcheck: Fix block number parsing on command line  (Mark Dilger <mark.dilger@enterprisedb.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 22.07.21 18:18, Mark Dilger wrote:
>> On Jul 22, 2021, at 7:56 AM, Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>>
>> Please check that it's up to speed.
>> <0001-pg_amcheck-Fix-block-number-parsing-on-command-line.patch>
> 
> This looks correct to me.  Thanks for the fix.

Committed this to 14 and master.

> Your use of strtoul compares favorably to that in pg_resetwal in that you are checking errno and it is not.  The
consequenceis:
 
> 
> bin % ./pg_resetwal/pg_resetwal -e 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111
> pg_resetwal: error: transaction ID epoch (-e) must not be -1
> bin % ./pg_resetwal/pg_resetwal -e junkstring
> pg_resetwal: error: invalid argument for option -e
> Try "pg_resetwal --help" for more information.
> 
> Unless people are relying on this behavior, I would think pg_resetwal should complain of an invalid argument for both
ofthose, rather than complaining about -1.  That's not to do with this patch, but if we're tightening up the use of
strtolin frontend tools, maybe we can use the identical logic in both places.
 

Committed a fix for this to master.



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Dinesh Chemuduru
Date:
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] new diagnostic items for the dynamic sql
Next
From: "tanghy.fnst@fujitsu.com"
Date:
Subject: RE: Skipping logical replication transactions on subscriber side