Re: Tightening up allowed custom GUC names
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Tightening up allowed custom GUC names |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1477413.1613068373@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Tightening up allowed custom GUC names (Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Tightening up allowed custom GUC names
Re: Tightening up allowed custom GUC names |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
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. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: