| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jacob Champion <pchampion(at)vmware(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com" <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz" <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, "sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net" <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Expose port->authn_id to extensions and triggers |
| Date: | 2022-02-25 21:23:49 |
| Message-ID: | 20220225212349.gf76klktl4dmm5ah@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2022-02-25 20:19:24 +0000, Jacob Champion wrote:
> From 2fde60a6bc3739f1894c8c264120e4fa0f04df64 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Jacob Champion <pchampion(at)vmware(dot)com>
> Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2022 08:10:53 -0800
> Subject: [PATCH v3] Add API to retrieve authn_id from SQL
> The authn_id field in MyProcPort is currently only accessible to the
> backend itself. Add a SQL function, session_authn_id(), to expose the
> field to triggers that may want to make use of it.
Looks to me like authn_id isn't synchronized to parallel workers right now. So
the function will return the wrong thing when executed as part of a parallel
query.
I don't think we should add further functions not prefixed with pg_.
Perhaps a few tests for less trivial authn_ids could be worthwhile?
E.g. certificate DNs.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2022-02-25 21:26:49 | Re: [PATCH] Expose port->authn_id to extensions and triggers |
| Previous Message | Chapman Flack | 2022-02-25 21:12:16 | Re: [PATCH] pg_permissions |