Re: [HACKERS] Proposal to add work_mem option to postgres_fdw module - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Proposal to add work_mem option to postgres_fdw module
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmoYchFefbb2uSx_vL10xO_6j76R3GjcfBfYKJjigpxMYPA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Proposal to add work_mem option to postgres_fdw module  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Proposal to add work_mem option to postgres_fdw module
Re: [HACKERS] Proposal to add work_mem option to postgres_fdw module
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 1:29 AM Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
> It seems to me that you would pass down just a string which gets
> allocated for "options", and injection risks are something to be careful
> about.  Another possibility would be an array with comma-separated
> arguments, say:
> options = 'option1=foo,option2=bar'
> There is already some work done with comma-separated arguments for the
> parameter "extensions", now that's more work.

I like the direction of your thinking, but it seems to me that this
would cause a problem if you want to set search_path=foo,bar.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: More parallel pg_dump bogosities
Next
From: Fabrízio de Royes Mello
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Proposal to add work_mem option to postgres_fdw module