Hello, Merlin. You wrote:
MM> On Jun 6 MM> (http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2011-06/msg00272.php), MM> Pavel discovered an issue with PQsetvalue that could cause libpq to MM> wander off into unallocated memory that was present in 9.0.x. A MM> fairly uninteresting fix was quickly produced, but Tom indicated MM> during subsequent review that he was not happy with the behavior of MM> the function. Everyone was busy with the beta wrap at the time so I MM> didn't press the issue. MM> A little history here: PQsetvalue's MM> (http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.0/static/libpq-misc.html) main MM> reason to exist is to allow creating a PGresult out of scratch data on MM> a result created via PQmakeEmptyResult(). This behavior works as MM> intended and is not controversial...it was initially done to support MM> libpqtypes but has apparently found use in other places like ecpg. MM> PQsetvalue *also* allows you to mess with results returned by the MM> server using standard query methods for any tuple, not just the one MM> you are creating as you iterate through. This behavior was MM> unnecessary in terms of what libpqtypes and friends needed and may (as MM> Tom suggested) come back to bite us at some point. As it turns out, MM> PQsetvalue's operation on results that weren't created via MM> PQmakeEmptyResult was totally busted because of the bug, so we have a MM> unique opportunity to tinker with libpq here: you could argue that you MM> have a window of opportunity to change the behavior here since we know MM> it isn't being usefully used. I think it's too late for that but it's MM> if it had to be done the time is now. MM> Pavel actually has been requesting to go further with being able to MM> mess around with PGresults (see: MM> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-interfaces/2011-06/msg00000.php), MM> such that the result would start to have some 'recordset' features you MM> find in various other libraries. Maybe it's not the job of libpq to MM> do that, but I happen to think it's pretty cool. Anyways, something MM> has to be done -- I hate to see an unpatched known 9.0 issue remain in MM> the wild. MM> merlin I confirm my desire to have delete tuple routine. And I'm ready to create\test\modify any sources for this. -- With best wishes, Pavel mailto:pa...@gf.microolap.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
