Re: Raising the SCRAM iteration count

Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz@postgresql.org>

From: "Jonathan S. Katz" <jkatz@postgresql.org>
To: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2023-02-22T17:21:03Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On 2/22/23 8:39 AM, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>> On 17 Dec 2022, at 04:27, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
>>

>> Superuser-only GUCs should be documented as such, or do you intend to
>> make it user-settable like I suggested upthread :) ?
> 
> I don't really have strong feelings, so I reverted to being user-settable since
> I can't really present a strong argument for superuser-only.

I was going to present some weak arguments, but not worth it. Anything 
around using up CPU cycles would be true of just writing plain old queries.

> The attached is a rebase on top of master with no other additional hacking done
> on top of the above review comments.

Generally LGTM. I read through earlier comments (sorry I missed 
replying) and have nothing to add or object to.

Jonathan

Commits

  1. Test SCRAM iteration changes with psql \password

  2. Make SCRAM iteration count configurable