On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 4:13 PM, Noah Misch <n...@leadboat.com> wrote:
> I share your (Kevin's) discomfort with our use of strlcpy(). I wouldn't > mind > someone replacing most strlcpy()/snprintf() calls with calls to wrappers > that > ereport(ERROR) on truncation. Though as reliability problems go, this one > has > been minor. > > Or maybe it would be better to just remove the restriction and just palloc something of the correct size? Although, that sounds like a much larger patch. I'd vote that the strlcpy should be used in the meantime. Regards David Rowley
