Re: Tightening up allowed custom GUC names - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Darafei "Komяpa" Praliaskouski
Subject Re: Tightening up allowed custom GUC names
Date
Msg-id CAC8Q8t+siW_K1dXrz+3ZkJ=HmYAenmNvKu_eyJLNeH5=+jfwUA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Tightening up allowed custom GUC names  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers


чц, 11 лют 2021, 21:33 карыстальнік Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> напісаў:
Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com> writes:
> On Tue, Feb 09, 2021 at 05:34:37PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> * A case could be made for tightening things up a lot more, and not
>> allowing anything that doesn't look like an identifier.  I'm not
>> pushing for that, as it seems more likely to break existing
>> applications than the narrow restriction proposed here.  But I could
>> live with it if people prefer that way.

> I'd prefer that.  Characters like backslash, space, and double quote have
> significant potential to reveal bugs, while having negligible application
> beyond revealing bugs.

Any other opinions here?  I'm hesitant to make such a change on the
basis of just one vote.

+1 for the change. I have not seen usage of = and - in the wild in GUC names but can see a harm of mis-interpretation of these. 




                        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Allowing create database within transaction block
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: repeated decoding of prepared transactions