Horton

Re: "buffer too small" or "path too long"?

Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2022-06-17T07:50:38Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On 15.06.22 19:08, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2022 at 2:51 AM Peter Eisentraut
> <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>> We have this problem of long file names being silently truncated all
>> over the source code.  Instead of equipping each one of them with a
>> length check, why don't we get rid of the fixed-size buffers and
>> allocate dynamically, as in the attached patch.
> 
> I've always wondered why we rely on MAXPGPATH instead of dynamic
> allocation. It seems pretty lame.

I think it came in before we had extensible string buffers APIs.

Commits

  1. pg_upgrade: further tweaking of make_outputdirs().

  2. Improve frontend error logging style.