Re: Sniffer/Stats Issues Reviewed

Jason wrote:
> St.Ego wrote:
>   
>>> ...
>>> There's also very little reason why a UA string needs to be more than 
>>> 255 characters.  The one Chad discovered could be considered malformed, 
>>> as it had an extraneous version/platform declaration and, being based on 
>>> Windows media center/IE, had three .NET CLR versions and the specific 
>>> developer's URL, 283 characters in all.
>>>       
>> FWIW, approximately 1/5 to 1/3 of all the Sniffer table entries were
>> truncated at max length to fit the field prior to the upgrade on that
>> client site. I believe the issue is MUCH more widespread than it may be
>> perceived.
>>     
>
> Perhaps we just need to make sure the entry is truncated to a length *we* set
> before we attempt to process it. The error being fixed here is one of an
> unexpected duplicate key due to the fact that we checked the existing
> (truncated) data against the incoming (not-truncated) data. Make sure both are
> truncated to avoid such an error.
>
> However, there are still race conditions possible, so perhaps the 'duplicate
> key' error should just be caught anyway and a further lookup performed to check
> whether another session has written the UA same string since we did a lookup
> (finding it not to be there).
>
> -- Jason
Keeping it truncated would be more of a convenience as a workaround, 
IMO. The changes submitted correct the issue instead of working around 
it, which would seem preferable, no?

-St.Ego