Re: Better HINT message for "unexpected data beyond EOF"

Christoph Berg <myon@debian.org>

From: Christoph Berg <myon@debian.org>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Jakub Wartak <jakub.wartak@enterprisedb.com>, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2025-04-01T13:54:49Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Re: Robert Haas
> > Another question is should we back-patch this? I believe we should (?)
> 
> I don't think this qualifies as a bug. The current wording isn't
> factually wrong, just unhelpful. Even if it were wrong, we need a
> pretty good reason to change message strings in a stable branch,
> because that can break things for users who are grepping for the
> current string (or a translation thereof). If an overwhelming
> consensus in favor of back-patching emerges, fine, but my gut feeling
> is that back-patching will make more people sad than it makes happy.

It's only the HINT part. If I were to grep/search for the message, I
would definitely use the message part.

Christoph



Commits

  1. Remove misleading hint for "unexpected data beyond EOF" error.

  2. md: Add comment & assert to buffer-zeroing path in md[start]readv()