Re: MySQL stored-procedure support for Postfix 3.2

2016-12-25 Thread John Fawcett
On 12/25/2016 01:17 AM, Wietse Venema wrote: > John Fawcett: >> Revised patch to improve error reporting when no result set containing >> data is returned > This code is now part of postfix-3.2-20161224-nonprod, slightly > edited to simplify error handling. I would be interested to hear > if it sti

Re: AW: Possible Bug ? postfix 3.1.0-3 fails on mysql table lookup

2016-12-25 Thread John Fawcett
On 12/18/2016 09:38 PM, John Fawcett wrote: > On 12/18/2016 02:09 AM, Wietse Venema wrote: >> What if Postfix made an old-style query? I think it should just >> report the old-style error here. >> >> Wietse > I agree. It might be as simple as changing > > msg_warn("dict_mysql: stored procedure

Re: MySQL stored-procedure support for Postfix 3.2

2016-12-25 Thread John Fawcett
On 12/25/2016 09:30 AM, John Fawcett wrote: > On 12/25/2016 01:17 AM, Wietse Venema wrote: >> John Fawcett: >>> Revised patch to improve error reporting when no result set containing >>> data is returned >> This code is now part of postfix-3.2-20161224-nonprod, slightly >> edited to simplify error

Re: Postfix delivery problem

2016-12-25 Thread G. Schlisio
> Georg > > I don't think there is enough evidence at the moment to say with > certainty that any change in glibc has introduced the problem, since you > were using that for a while now without seeing issues. > > I'd still be interested in knowing what output the test program gives on > the affec

Re: Postfix delivery problem

2016-12-25 Thread John Fawcett
On 12/25/2016 11:10 AM, G. Schlisio wrote: >> Georg >> >> I don't think there is enough evidence at the moment to say with >> certainty that any change in glibc has introduced the problem, since you >> were using that for a while now without seeing issues. >> >> I'd still be interested in knowing w

Re: MySQL stored-procedure support for Postfix 3.2

2016-12-25 Thread Wietse Venema
John Fawcett: [ Charset windows-1252 converted... ] > On 12/25/2016 09:30 AM, John Fawcett wrote: > > On 12/25/2016 01:17 AM, Wietse Venema wrote: > >> John Fawcett: > >>> Revised patch to improve error reporting when no result set containing > >>> data is returned > >> This code is now part of pos

Re: Postfix delivery problem

2016-12-25 Thread Wietse Venema
John Fawcett: > for an inexistent user for strings up to 31 chars. From 32 chars onwards > instead of returning not found it retuns EINVAL (invalid argument). > > ./test AAA > Not found > ./test > getpwnam_r: Invalid argument Perhaps th

Re: MySQL stored-procedure support for Postfix 3.2

2016-12-25 Thread John Fawcett
On 12/25/2016 04:46 PM, Wietse Venema wrote: > John Fawcett: > [ Charset windows-1252 converted... ] >> On 12/25/2016 09:30 AM, John Fawcett wrote: >>> On 12/25/2016 01:17 AM, Wietse Venema wrote: John Fawcett: > Revised patch to improve error reporting when no result set containing >

Re: Postfix delivery problem

2016-12-25 Thread John Fawcett
On 12/25/2016 05:12 PM, Wietse Venema wrote: > John Fawcett: >> for an inexistent user for strings up to 31 chars. From 32 chars onwards >> instead of returning not found it retuns EINVAL (invalid argument). >> >> ./test AAA >> Not found >> ./test AAA

Re: Postfix delivery problem

2016-12-25 Thread G. Schlisio
> > I tried that on archlinux. The above program still produces EINVAL for > login names between 32 and 255 inclusive. > > _SC_LOGIN_NAME_MAX is 256 on that platform. > > John > hi, earlier i tried with literal "AA", which was probably not what you meant. it produced a "not found". using

Re: Postfix delivery problem

2016-12-25 Thread John Fawcett
On 12/25/2016 06:30 PM, G. Schlisio wrote: >> I tried that on archlinux. The above program still produces EINVAL for >> login names between 32 and 255 inclusive. >> >> _SC_LOGIN_NAME_MAX is 256 on that platform. >> >> John >> > hi, > > earlier i tried with literal "AA", which was probably not w

Re: Postfix delivery problem

2016-12-25 Thread John Fawcett
On 12/25/2016 07:40 PM, John Fawcett wrote: > Hi Georg > thanks for that, so at least we have consistent behaviour which is good. > I had got the from your logging without realizing it was > anonymized. > > Now the problem to solve is why the user names you are testing with give > the inva

Re: MySQL stored-procedure support for Postfix 3.2

2016-12-25 Thread Wietse Venema
; you can't run this command now Noted. Meanwhile I have separated 1) the code that handles the result set with the lookup result, from 2) the code that handles all other result sets. Without interleaving 1) and 2), the code becomes easier to follow. It's uploaded as postfix-3.2-20161225-nonprod; please check it out. Wietse

Re: MySQL stored-procedure support for Postfix 3.2

2016-12-25 Thread John Fawcett
and 2), the code becomes easier to follow. > It's uploaded as postfix-3.2-20161225-nonprod; please check it out. > > Wietse I confirm it behaves as expected on positive and negative cases. The code is indeed much easier to follow. John

Re: MySQL stored-procedure support for Postfix 3.2

2016-12-25 Thread Wietse Venema
John Fawcett: > > Noted. Meanwhile I have separated 1) the code that handles the > > result set with the lookup result, from 2) the code that handles > > all other result sets. > > > > Without interleaving 1) and 2), the code becomes easier to follow. > > I