Horton

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

Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.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: 2022-06-15T17:08:11Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
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 don't know how much we gain by fixing one place and not all the
others, but maybe it would set a trend.

-- 
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Commits

  1. pg_upgrade: further tweaking of make_outputdirs().

  2. Improve frontend error logging style.