From: | "Dave Page" <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk> |
---|---|
To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | "Ian FREISLICH" <if(at)hetzner(dot)co(dot)za>, <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [PATCH] pg_autovacuum commandline password hiding. |
Date: | 2005-05-24 15:47:38 |
Message-ID: | E7F85A1B5FF8D44C8A1AF6885BC9A0E490E08C@ratbert.vale-housing.co.uk |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-patches |
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us]
> Sent: 24 May 2005 16:02
> To: Dave Page
> Cc: Ian FREISLICH; pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
> Subject: Re: [PATCHES] [PATCH] pg_autovacuum commandline
> password hiding.
>
> "Dave Page" <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk> writes:
> >> Which is exactly why we don't (and won't) provide such a switch.
>
> > Err, yes we do:
>
> Um, sorry, I totally misread Ian's patch as a proposal that we add a
> password switch (I hate unidiffs ;-)).
:-)
> I would argue actually that this switch is a horrible idea and we
> must take it out entirely. The method Ian proposes for hiding the
> password after reading it is certainly not portable in the slightest,
> and even if we could make it work on all platforms (which we can't)
> I don't think it would be good enough, because there would still be
> a window where the superuser password was exposed to view before
> we could wipe it out.
Agreed. The attached patch should do the trick.
Regards, Dave
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
pg_autovacuum.diff | application/octet-stream | 6.9 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2005-05-24 15:53:45 | Re: plperl strict mode |
Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2005-05-24 15:41:01 | Re: [PATCH] pg_autovacuum commandline password hiding. |