Horton

Re: Possible regression setting GUCs on \connect

Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz@postgresql.org>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: "Jonathan S. Katz" <jkatz@postgresql.org>
To: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>, Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com>, David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2023-05-17T16:57:45Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On 5/17/23 12:47 PM, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> On Wed, May 17, 2023 at 08:08:36AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> writes:
>>> Tom/Nathan, do you have any further suggestions here?
>>
>> My recommendation is to revert this feature.  I do not see any
>> way that we won't regret it as a poor design.
> 
> I agree.  The problem seems worth solving, but I think we ought to consider
> a different approach.  Apologies for not chiming in earlier on the original
> thread.

[RMT hat, personal opinion]

I do agree that the feature itself is useful, but given there is 
disagreement over the feature design, particularly from people who have 
spent time working on features and analyzing the security ramifications 
in this area, the safest option is to revert and try again for v17.

I suggest we revert before Beta 1.

Thanks,

Jonathan

Commits

  1. Revert "Add USER SET parameter values for pg_db_role_setting"

  2. Fix wrong construct_array_builtin() call in GUCArrayDelete()

  3. In hstore_plpython, avoid crashing when return value isn't a mapping.

  4. Allow granting SET and ALTER SYSTEM privileges on GUC parameters.