Re: [PATCH] Add inline comments to the pg_hba_file_rules view

From: Jim Jones <jim(dot)jones(at)uni-muenster(dot)de>
To: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add inline comments to the pg_hba_file_rules view
Date: 2023-09-28 09:55:58
Message-ID: 67fbaedc-6983-1f06-822d-6db487cb505a@uni-muenster.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi Daniel

On 27.09.23 10:21, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> An annotation syntax specifically for this would address my concern,
> but the
> argument that pg_hba (and related code) is border-line too complicated as it is
> does hold some water. Complexity in code can lead to bugs, but complexity in
> syntax can lead to misconfigurations or unintentional infosec leaks which is
> usually more problematic.
Yeah, that's why the possibility to use the normal comments for this
feature seemed at first so appealing :)
> I would propose to not worry about code and instead just discuss a potential
> new format for annotations, and only implement parsing and handling once
> something has been agreed upon. This should be in a new thread however to
> ensure visibility, since it's beyond the subject of this thread.

Sounds good! I will open a new thread as soon as I get back home, so
that we can collect some ideas.

Thanks

Jim

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Heikki Linnakangas 2023-09-28 09:58:12 Re: Latches vs lwlock contention
Previous Message Bharath Rupireddy 2023-09-28 09:32:21 Re: [PoC] pg_upgrade: allow to upgrade publisher node