Re: Naming of gss_accept_deleg

From: Abhijit Menon-Sen <ams(at)toroid(dot)org>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Naming of gss_accept_deleg
Date: 2023-05-19 13:35:19
Message-ID: ZGd7F5ycNYiOXeuo@toroid.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

At 2023-05-19 09:16:09 -0400, bruce(at)momjian(dot)us wrote:
>
> On Fri, May 19, 2023 at 09:07:26AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> >
> > > Why is the new PG 16 GUC called "gss_accept_deleg" and not
> > > "gss_accept_delegation"? The abbreviation here seems atypical.
> >
> > At the time it felt natural to me but I don't feel strongly about it,
> > happy to change it if folks would prefer it spelled out.
>
> Yes, please do spell it out, thanks. The fact "deleg" looks similar to
> "debug" also doesn't help.

Note that GSS-API itself calls it the "DELEG" flag:

if (conn->gcred != GSS_C_NO_CREDENTIAL)
gss_flags |= GSS_C_DELEG_FLAG;

I would also prefer a GUC named gss_accept_delegation, but the current
name matches the libpq gssdeleg connection parameter and the PGSSDELEG
environment variable. Maybe there's something to be said for keeping
those three things alike?

-- Abhijit

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2023-05-19 13:42:00 Re: Naming of gss_accept_deleg
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2023-05-19 13:16:09 Re: Naming of gss_accept_deleg