Horton

Re: Raising the SCRAM iteration count

Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>
To: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Cc: "Gregory Stark (as CFM)" <stark.cfm@gmail.com>, "Jonathan S. Katz" <jkatz@postgresql.org>, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2023-03-24T08:56:29Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Attachments

> On 24 Mar 2023, at 00:33, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
> 
> 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.

Yeah, that's my fallback in case we are unable to get the TAP refactoring done
in time for the end of the CF/feature freeze.

I've actually ripped out the test in question in the attached v9 to have it
ready and building green in CFbot.

--
Daniel Gustafsson

Commits

  1. Test SCRAM iteration changes with psql \password

  2. Make SCRAM iteration count configurable