Re: libpq: Process buffered SSL read bytes to support records >8kB on async API - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From vignesh C
Subject Re: libpq: Process buffered SSL read bytes to support records >8kB on async API
Date
Msg-id CALDaNm0_h2PdpzCddUKv7Z3k1oDg-fBXxjrENeZh7xdHYMCWkA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: libpq: Process buffered SSL read bytes to support records >8kB on async API  (Jacob Champion <jacob.champion@enterprisedb.com>)
Responses Re: libpq: Process buffered SSL read bytes to support records >8kB on async API
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, 12 Sept 2024 at 04:30, Jacob Champion
<jacob.champion@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 11, 2024 at 12:08 PM Lars Kanis <lars@greiz-reinsdorf.de> wrote:
> > How did you verify the issue on the server side - with YugabyteDB or
> > with a modified Postgres server? I'd like to verify the GSSAPI part and
> > I'm familiar with the Postgres server only.
>
> Neither, unfortunately -- I have a protocol testbed that I use for
> this kind of stuff. I'm happy to share once I get it cleaned up, but
> it's unlikely to help you in this case since I haven't implemented
> gssenc support. Patching the Postgres server itself seems like a good
> way to go.
>
> > > And are there any other sites that
> > > need to make the same guarantee before returning?
> >
> > Which other sites do you mean?
>
> I'm mostly worried that other parts of libpq might assume that a
> single call to pqReadData will drain the buffers. If not, great! --
> but I haven't had time to check all the call sites.

@Jacob, could you find some time to wrap this up? This will help us
assess whether it can be refined into a committable state soon.

Regards,
Vignesh



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: vignesh C
Date:
Subject: Re: FSM doesn't recover after zeroing damaged page.
Next
From: vignesh C
Date:
Subject: Re: Adding support for SSLKEYLOGFILE in the frontend