Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1uIpq5-00CAJ6-Gn for pgsql-bugs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Sat, 24 May 2025 14:27:05 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1uIpq4-00C5gx-3S for pgsql-bugs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Sat, 24 May 2025 14:27:03 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1uIpq3-00C5gp-Ra for pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org; Sat, 24 May 2025 14:27:03 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([68.162.161.243]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1uIpq0-000kl6-1E for pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org; Sat, 24 May 2025 14:27:03 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 54OEQrtJ3060114; Sat, 24 May 2025 10:26:53 -0400 From: Tom Lane To: Chris Gooch cc: Jacob Champion , "pgsql-bugs@lists.postgresql.org" Subject: Re: [EXT] Re: GSS Auth issue when user member of lots of AD groups In-reply-to: References: <1529314.1747928806@sss.pgh.pa.us> <1536692.1747933034@sss.pgh.pa.us> <1647590.1747936713@sss.pgh.pa.us> Comments: In-reply-to Chris Gooch message dated "Sat, 24 May 2025 10:01:05 -0000" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <3060112.1748096813.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Date: Sat, 24 May 2025 10:26:53 -0400 Message-ID: <3060113.1748096813@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Archived-At: Precedence: bulk Chris Gooch writes: > Hi Both, Will anyone be working on a fix for this bug? Yeah, I will pick it up (unless Jacob's already on it?) I believe we've agreed that it'd be sufficient if we allow the packets exchanged during the auth phase to be up to 64K or so, but once we reach the point where we're able to split the data on arbitrary boundaries, keep the packet size at 16K for cross-version compatibility. I did look at the code briefly, and this seems like it'd require releasing and re-alloc'ing the buffers, but that's surely doable. regards, tom lane