Re: Tightening up allowed custom GUC names

Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>

From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Date: 2021-02-11T18:32:53Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com> writes:
> On Tue, Feb 09, 2021 at 05:34:37PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> * A case could be made for tightening things up a lot more, and not
>> allowing anything that doesn't look like an identifier.  I'm not
>> pushing for that, as it seems more likely to break existing
>> applications than the narrow restriction proposed here.  But I could
>> live with it if people prefer that way.

> I'd prefer that.  Characters like backslash, space, and double quote have
> significant potential to reveal bugs, while having negligible application
> beyond revealing bugs.

Any other opinions here?  I'm hesitant to make such a change on the
basis of just one vote.

			regards, tom lane



Commits

  1. Tighten up allowed names for custom GUC parameters.