Re: Raising the SCRAM iteration count
Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
From: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
To: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>
Cc: "Jonathan S. Katz" <jkatz@postgresql.org>, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2023-03-08T07:48:31Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Mar 07, 2023 at 02:03:05PM +0100, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: > On 7 Mar 2023, at 09:26, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se> wrote: >> Right, what I meant was: can a pg_regress sql/expected test drive a psql >> interactive prompt? Your comments suggested using password.sql so I was >> curious if I was missing a neat trick for doing this. Yes, I meant to rely just on password.sql to do that. I think that I see your point now.. You are worried that the SET command changing a GUC to-be-reported would not affect the client before \password is done. That could be possible, I guess. ReportChangedGUCOptions() is called before ReadyForQuery() that would tell psql that the backend is ready to receive the next query. A trick would be to stick an extra dummy query between the SET and \password in password.sql? > Running interactive tests against psql adds a fair bit of complexity and isn't > all that pleasing on the eye, but it can be cleaned up and refactored when > https://commitfest.postgresql.org/42/4228/ is committed. I have not looked at that, so no idea. -- Michael
Commits
-
Test SCRAM iteration changes with psql \password
- bf5a894c5571 16.0 landed
-
Make SCRAM iteration count configurable
- b577743000cd 16.0 landed