Re: Raising the SCRAM iteration count

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>
Cc: "Gregory Stark (as CFM)" <stark(dot)cfm(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Jonathan S(dot) Katz" <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Raising the SCRAM iteration count
Date: 2023-03-23 23:33:49
Message-ID: ZBzh3S2CfuoIwzCI@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 10:46:56PM +0100, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> I'm fairly convinced it's a timeout in the interactive psql session. Given how
> ugly the use of that is I'm sort of waiting for Andres' refactoring patch [0] to
> commit this such that I can rewrite the test in a saner and more robust way.

FWIW, I'd be OK here even if you don't have a test for libpq in the
first change as what you have sent is already testing for the core
machinery in scram-common.c. You could always add one later.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2023-03-23 23:56:35 Re: Remove nonmeaningful prefixes in PgStat_* fields
Previous Message Peter Smith 2023-03-23 23:22:08 Re: PGDOCS - function pg_get_publication_tables is not documented?