From: | Abhishek Chanda <abhishek(dot)becs(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Jacob Champion <jacob(dot)champion(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Adding support for SSLKEYLOGFILE in the frontend |
Date: | 2025-03-13 23:02:35 |
Message-ID: | CAKiP-K_MZPpLpznyqPVNSy50DtsDBzb+8sQsp1nhbHqZ7zwfLQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Thanks, Daniel.
Should there be the ifdef guard in here as well?
+ {"sslkeylogfile", NULL, NULL, NULL,
+ "SSL-Key-Log-File", "", 0, /* sizeof("") = 0 */
+ offsetof(struct pg_conn, sslkeylogfile)},
+
A small nit, this line should say NULL
+ /* line is guaranteed by OpenSSL to be NUL terminated */
Thanks
On Thu, Mar 13, 2025 at 5:07 PM Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 13 Mar 2025, at 19:31, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> >
> > Jacob Champion <jacob(dot)champion(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> >> Adding the PG prefix to the envvar name addresses my collision
> >> concern, but I think Tom's comment upthread [1] was saying that we
> >> should not provide any envvar at all:
> >
> >>> I think it might be safer if we only accepted it as a connection
> >>> parameter and not via an environment variable.
> >
> >> Is the addition of the PG prefix enough to address that concern too?
> >
> > Indeed, I was advocating for *no* environment variable. The PG prefix
> > does not comfort me.
>
> Attached is a rebased version which fixes the test failure under autoconf (I
> had missed git adding the configure file..) and Windows where the backslashes
> weren't escaped properly. It also removes the environment variable and has
> documentation touchups.
>
> --
> Daniel Gustafsson
>
--
Thanks and regards
Abhishek Chanda
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tomas Vondra | 2025-03-13 23:11:39 | Re: Changing the state of data checksums in a running cluster |
Previous Message | Thomas Munro | 2025-03-13 22:31:47 | Re: md.c vs elog.c vs smgrreleaseall() in barrier |