Re: [PATCH v9] GSSAPI encryption support

On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 6:10 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> If that's what it is, it seems fairly broken to have it connected up to a
> GUC variable.  Especially one that's USERSET; some people will wonder why
> frobbing it with SET does nothing, and others will bitch that they think
> it should be superuser-only or some such.  I'd keep it localized to the
> connection logic, myself.  There's already logic in ProcessStartupPacket
> for connection options that aren't GUC variables, so I'd suggest adding
> another case there instead of pretending this is a settable GUC variable.

Argh, yes right. That's what we should look for.
-- 
Michael