Re: ECPG installcheck tests fail if PGDATABASE is set - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: ECPG installcheck tests fail if PGDATABASE is set
Date
Msg-id 18551.1521419298@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: ECPG installcheck tests fail if PGDATABASE is set  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
Responses Re: ECPG installcheck tests fail if PGDATABASE is set  (Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>)
List pgsql-hackers
Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> On 2018-03-18 19:30:33 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Is it sane for pg_regress to unset PGDATABASE unconditionally?  Not
>> sure, but if we're generally always specifying a value, maybe that's
>> OK.

> I'm not sure either.  I wonder whether we should just make ecpg's
> pg_regress invocation do so?  That seems to be the way of least
> resistance ;)

Don't think I like ecpg's tests behaving differently in this respect
than the rest of them do; that seems like a recipe for unrecognized
security issues.

If nobody can think of a positive reason for pg_regress not to
unset PGDATABASE unconditionally, let's try that and see how it
goes.

            regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Flexible permissions for REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW
Next
From: Tomas Vondra
Date:
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Shared Ispell dictionaries