On Dec 17, 2010, at 7:04 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote:
> On Dec 16, 2010, at 8:39 PM, Alex Hunsaker wrote:
>
>>> No, URI::Escape is fine. The issue is that if you don't decode text to
>>> Perl's internal form, it assumes that it's Latin-1.
>>
>> So... you are saying "\xc3\xa9" eq "\xe9" or chr(233) ?
>
> Not knowing what those mean, I'm not saying either one, to my knowledge. What
> I understand, however, is that Perl, given a scalar with bytes in it, will
> treat it as latin-1 unless the utf8 flag is turned on.
This is a correct assertion as to Perl's behavior. As far as PostgreSQL
is/should be concerned in this case, this is the correct handling for
URI::Escape, as the input string to the function was all ASCII (= valid UTF-8),
so the function author would need to be responsible for the proper conversion
to the internal encoding. This would just be a simple decode_utf8() call in
the case that you've URI-escaped UTF-8-encoded unicode, however since URI
escaping is only defined for octets, the meaning of those unescaped octets is
detached from their encoding. There are similar issues with using other
modules which traditionally have not distinguished between characters and bytes
(as an examples Digest::MD5); Digest::MD5 does not work on wide characters, as
the algorithm only deals with octets, so you need to pick a target encoding for
wide characters and encode the octets themselves rather than the characters.
>> Im saying they are not, and if you want \xc3\xa9 to be treated as
>> chr(233) you need to tell perl what encoding the string is in (err
>> well actually decode it so its in "perl space" as unicode characters
>> correctly).
>
> PostgreSQL should do everything it can to decode to Perl's internal format
> before passing arguments, and to decode from Perl's internal format on output.
+1 on the original sentiment, but only for the case that we're dealing with
data that is passed in/out as arguments. In the case that the server_encoding
is UTF-8, this is as trivial as a few macros on the underlying SVs for
text-like types. If the server_encoding is SQL_ASCII (= byte soup), this is a
trivial case of doing nothing with the conversion regardless of data type. For
any other server_encoding, the data would need to be converted from the
server_encoding to UTF-8, presumably using the built-in conversions before
passing it off to the first code path. A similar handling would need to be
done for the return values, again datatype-dependent.
This certainly seems like it could be inefficient in the case that we're using
a non-utf8 server_encoding (there are people who do?? :-P), however from the
standpoint of correctness, any plperl function that deals with this data as
characters (using common things like regexes, length, ord, chr, substring, \w
metachars) will have the potential of operating incorrectly when provided with
data that is in a different encoding than perl's internal format. One thought
I had was that we could expose the server_encoding to the plperl interpreters
in a special variable to make it easy to explicitly decode if we needed, but
the problems with this are: a) there's no guarantee that Encode.pm will have a
alias/support for the specific server_encoding name as provided by Pg, and b)
in the case of plperl (i.e., not u), there are horrendous issues when trying to
deal with Safe.pm and character encoding. Recent upgrades of the Encode module
included with perl 5.10+ have caused issues wherein circular dependencies
between Encode and Encode::Alias have made it impossible to load in a Safe
container without major pain. (There may be some better options than I'd had
on a previous project, given that we're embedding our own interpreters and
accessing more through the XS guts, so I'm not ruling out this possibility
completely).
Perhaps we could set a function attribute or similar which indicated that we
wanted to decode the input properly on input, whether or not this should be the
default, or at the very least expose a function to the plperl[u]? runtime that
would decode/upgrade on demand without the caller of the function needing to
know the encoding of the database it is running in. This would solve issue a),
because any supported server_encoding would have an internal conversion to
utf8, and solves b) because we're avoiding the conversion from inside Safe and
simply running our XS function on the input data. (As much as I hate the
ugliness of it, if we decide the decoding behavior shouldn't be the default we
could even use one of those ugly function pragmas in the function bodies.)
>>> Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but it seems to me that:
>>>
>>> * String arguments passed to PL/Perl functions should be decoded from the
>>> server encoding to Perl's internal representation before the function
>>> actually gets them.
>>
>> Currently postgres has 2 behaviors:
>> 1) If the database is utf8, turn on the utf8 flag. According to the
>> perldoc snippet I quoted this should mean its a sequence of utf8 bytes
>> and should interpret it as such.
>
> Well that works for me. I always use UTF8. Oleg, what was the encoding of
> your database where you saw the issue?
I'm not sure what the current plperl runtime does as far as marshaling this,
but it would be fairly easy to ensure the parameters came in in perl's internal
format given a server_encoding of UTF8 and some type introspection to identify
the string-like types/text data. (Perhaps any type which had a binary cast to
text would be a sufficient definition here. Do domains automatically inherit
binary casts from their originating types?)
>> 2) its not utf8, so we just leave it as octets.
>
> Which mean's Perl will assume that it's Latin-1, IIUC.
This is sub-optimal for non-UTF-8-encoded databases, for reasons I pointed out
earlier. This would produce bogus results for any non-UTF-8, non-ASCII, non
latin-1 encoding, even if it did not generally bite most people in general
usage.
>> So in "perl space" length($_[0]) returns the number of characters when
>> you pass in a multibyte char *not* the number of bytes. Which is
>> correct, so um check we do that. Right?
>
> Yeah. So I just wrote and tested this function on 9.0 with Perl 5.12.2:
>
> CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION perlgets(
> TEXT
> ) RETURNS TABLE(length INT, is_utf8 BOOL) LANGUAGE plperl AS $$
> my $text = shift;
> return_next {
> length => length $text,
> is_utf8 => utf8::is_utf8($text) ? 1 : 0
> };
> $$;
>
> In a utf-8 database:
>
> utf8=# select * from perlgets('foo');
> length │ is_utf8
> ────────┼─────────
> 8 │ t
> (1 row)
This example seems bogus; wouldn't length be 3 if this is the example text this
was run with? Additionally, since all ASCII is trivially UTF-8, I think a
better example would be using a string with hi-bit characters so if this was
improperly handled the lengths wouldn't match; length($all_ascii) ==
length(encode_utf8($all_ascii)) vs length($hi_bit) <
length(encode_utf8($hi_bit)). I don't see that this test shows us much with
the test case as given. The is_utf8() function merely returns the state of the
SV_utf8 flag, which doesn't speak to UTF-8 validity (i.e., this need not be set
on ascii-only strings, which are still valid in the UTF-8 encoding), nor does
it indicate that there are no hi-bit characters in the string (i.e., with
encode_utf8($hi_bit_string)), the source string $hi_bit_string (in perl's
internal format) with hi-bit characters will have the utf8 flag set, but the
return value of encode_utf8 will not, even though the underlying data, as
represented in perl will be identical).
> In a latin-1 database:
>
> latin=# select * from perlgets('foo');
> length │ is_utf8
> ────────┼─────────
> 8 │ f
> (1 row)
>
> I would argue that in the latter case, is_utf8 should be true, too. That is,
> PL/Perl should decode from Latin-1 to Perl's internal form.
See above for discussion of the is_utf8 flag; if we're dealing with latin-1
data or (more precisely in this case) data that has not been decoded from the
server_encoding to perl's internal format, this would exactly be the
expectation for the state of that flag.
> Interestingly, when I created a function that takes a bytea argument, utf8
> was *still* enabled in the utf-8 database. That doesn't seem right to me.
I'm not sure what you mean here, but I do think that if bytea is identifiable
as one of the input types, we should do no encoding on the data itself, which
would indicate that the utf8 flag for that variable would be unset. If this is
not currently handled this way, I'd be a bit surprised, as bytea should just be
an array of bytes with no character semantics attached to it.
>> In the URI::Escape example we have:
>>
>> # CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION url_decode(Vkw varchar) RETURNS varchar AS $$
>> use URI::Escape;
>> warn(length($_[0]));
>> return uri_unescape($_[0]); $$ LANGUAGE plperlu;
>>
>> # select url_decode('comment%20passer%20le%20r%C3%A9veillon');
>> WARNING: 38 at line 2
>
> What's the output? And what's the encoding of the database?
>
>> Ok that length looks right, just for grins lets try add one multibyte char:
>>
>> # SELECT url_decode('comment%20passer%20le%20r%C3%A9veillon☺');
>> WARNING: 39 CONTEXT: PL/Perl function "url_decode" at line 2.
>> url_decode
>> -------------------------------
>> comment passer le réveillon☺
>> (1 row)
>>
>> Still right,
>
> The length is right, but the é is wrong. It looks like Perl thinks it's
> latin-1. Or, rather, unescape_uri() dosn't know that it should be returning
> utf-8 characters. That *might* be a bug in URI::Escape.
I think this has been addressed by others in previous emails.
>> now lets try the utf8::decode version that "works". Only
>> lets look at the length of the string we are returning instead of the
>> one we are passing in:
>>
>> # CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION url_decode(Vkw varchar) RETURNS varchar AS $$
>> use URI::Escape;
>> utf8::decode($_[0]);
>> my $str = uri_unescape($_[0]);
>> warn(length($str));
>> return $str;
>> $$ LANGUAGE plperlu;
>>
>> # SELECT url_decode('comment%20passer%20le%20r%C3%A9veillon');
>> WARNING: 28 at line 5.
>> CONTEXT: PL/Perl function "url_decode"
>> url_decode
>> -----------------------------
>> comment passer le réveillon
>> (1 row)
>>
>> Looks harmless enough...
>
> Looks far better, in fact. Interesting that URI::Escape does the right thing
> only if the utf8 flag has been turned on in the string passed to it. But in
> Perl it usually won't be, because the encoded string should generally have
> only ASCII characters.
I think you'll find that this "correct display" is actually an artifact of your
terminal type being set to a UTF-8 compatible encoding and interpreting the raw
output as the UTF-8 sequence in its output display; that returned count is
actually the number of octets, compare:
$ perl -MURI::Escape -e'print
length(uri_unescape(q{comment%20passer%20le%20r%C3%A9veillon}))'
28
$ perl -MEncode -MURI::Escape -e'print
length(decode_utf8(uri_unescape(q{comment%20passer%20le%20r%C3%A9veillon})))'
27
>> # SELECT length(url_decode('comment%20passer%20le%20r%C3%A9veillon'));
>> WARNING: 28 at line 5.
>> CONTEXT: PL/Perl function "url_decode"
>> length
>> --------
>> 27
>> (1 row)
>>
>> Wait a minute... those lengths should match.
>>
>> Post patch they do:
>> # SELECT length(url_decode('comment%20passer%20le%20r%C3%A9veillon'));
>> WARNING: 28 at line 5.
>> CONTEXT: PL/Perl function "url_decode"
>> length
>> --------
>> 28
>> (1 row)
>>
>> Still confused? Yeah me too.
>
> Yeah…
As shown above, the character length for the example should be 27, while the
octet length for the UTF-8 encoded version is 28. I've reviewed the source of
URI::Escape, and can say definitively that: a) regular uri_escape does not
handle > 255 code points in the encoding, but there exists a uri_escape_utf8
which will convert the source string to UTF8 first and then escape the encoded
value, and b) uri_unescape has *no* logic in it to automatically decode from
UTF8 into perl's internal format (at least as far as the version that I'm
looking at, which came with 5.10.1).
>> Maybe this will help:
>>
>> #!/usr/bin/perl
>> use URI::Escape;
>> my $str = uri_unescape("%c3%a9");
>> die "first match" if($str =~ m/\xe9/);
>> utf8::decode($str);
>> die "2nd match" if($str =~ m/\xe9/);
>>
>> gives:
>> $ perl t.pl
>> 2nd match at t.pl line 6.
>>
>> see? Either uri_unescape() should be decoding that utf8() or you need
>> to do it *after* you call uri_unescape(). Hence the maybe it could be
>> considered a bug in uri_unescape().
>
> Agreed.
-1; if you need to decode from an octets-only encoding, it's your
responsibility to do so after you've unescaped it. Perhaps later versions of
the URI::Escape module contain a uri_unescape_utf8() function, but it's
trivially: sub uri_unescape_utf8 { Encode::decode_utf8(uri_unescape(shift))}.
This is definitely not a bug in uri_escape, as it is only defined to return
octets.
>>> * Values returned from PL/Perl functions that are in Perl's internal
>>> representation should be encoded into the server encoding before they're
>>> returned.
>>> I didn't really follow all of the above; are you aiming for the same thing?
>>
>> Yeah, the patch address this part. Right now we just spit out
>> whatever the internal format happens to be.
>
> Ah, excellent.
I agree with the sentiments that: data (server_encoding) -> function parameters
(-> perl internal) -> function return (-> server_encoding). This should be for
any character-type data insofar as it is feasible, but ISTR there is already
datatype-specific marshaling occurring.
>> Anyway its all probably clear as mud, this part of perl is one of the
>> hardest IMO.
>
> No question.
There is definitely a lot of confusion surrounding perl's handling of character
data; I hope this was able to clear a few things up.
Regards,
David
--
David Christensen
End Point Corporation
da...@endpoint.com
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
