On Sun, Aug 7, 2011 at 5:01 PM, Tyron Madlener <tyronx@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, Aug 7, 2011 at 2:06 PM, Marc Delisle <marc@infomarc.info> wrote:
> Le 2011-08-06 07:59, Madhura Jayaratne a écrit :
>> Hi all,
>>
>> While attending to a bug [1], I came across the following.
>> Suhosin imposes a limit of 512 on the length of the variable that can be
>> passed via a GET [2]. This is often problematic as in PMA we encounter long
>> parameters (long sql queries, where clauses when no unique key is there
>> etc). Due to the same problem [3] $cfg['LinkLengthLimit'] configuration was
>> lowered to more stricter 1000 from 2000, which is more acceptable.
>>
>> In this particular bug the problem is that, though the URL length is under
>> 1000, one parameter, 'sql_query', violates the Suhosin limit. What
>> should be our stand on this. Should we adhere to Suhosin default values?
>>
>> In 3.5 we have a possible solution for this [4] and we can still lower
>> $cfg['LinkLengthLimit'] value without losing the look and feel. However this
>> needs to have JS enabled and I'm not sure whether we want to impose that
>> condition for the 3.4 series.
>
> Madhura,
> see Documentation.html, FAQ 1.38. You might want to add a suggestion
> there about suhosin.get.max_value_length.
>
> As you can deduce from this FAQ entry, it was not our intention to adapt
> to Suhosin's limits.

Would there be any problem in using min($cfg['LinkLengthLimit'],
[suhoins max length]) for pma?

Suhosin imposes a limit on the length of a single value passed via a GET, not on the length of the entire URL, so if we are to adhere to it we need to change the code a bit. And further if we do not wish to comply with it I do not see a point in doing so.

--
Thanks and Regards,

Madhura Jayaratne