Re: Tightening up allowed custom GUC names

Darafei Komяpa Praliaskouski <me@komzpa.net>

From: Darafei "Komяpa" Praliaskouski <me@komzpa.net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2021-02-11T18:59:46Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
чц, 11 лют 2021, 21:33 карыстальнік Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> напісаў:

> 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.
>

+1 for the change. I have not seen usage of = and - in the wild in GUC
names but can see a harm of mis-interpretation of these.




>                         regards, tom lane
>
>
>

Commits

  1. Tighten up allowed names for custom GUC parameters.