Re: Improper use about DatumGetInt32
Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>
From: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
Cc: Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat@2ndquadrant.com>,
Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat.oss@gmail.com>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>,
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>,
"Hou, Zhijie" <houzj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>,
PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2020-11-26T16:27:03Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On 2020-11-26 14:27, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > On 2020-Nov-26, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > >> The point of the patch is to have the range check somewhere. If you just >> cast it, then you won't notice out of range arguments. Note that other >> contrib modules that take block numbers work the same way. > > I'm not saying not to do that; just saying we should not propagate it to > places that don't need it. get_raw_page gets its page number from > PG_GETARG_INT64(), and the range check should be there. But then it > calls get_raw_page_internal, and it could pass a BlockNumber -- there's > no need to pass an int64. So get_raw_page_internal does not need a > range check. Yeah, I had it like that for a moment, but then you need to duplicate the check in get_raw_page() and get_raw_page_fork(). I figured since get_raw_page_internal() does all the other argument checking also, it seems sensible to put the block range check there too. But it's not a big deal either way.
Commits
-
pageinspect: Change block number arguments to bigint
- f18aa1b20393 14.0 landed
-
tablefunc: Reject negative number of tuples passed to normal_rand()
- f73999262ed6 14.0 landed
-
Use PG_GETARG_TRANSACTIONID where appropriate
- dd26a0ad760b 14.0 landed