From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>
cc: pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Tightening up allowed custom GUC names
In-reply-to: <20210209230155.GA551305@rfd.leadboat.com>
References: <951335.1612910077@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <20210209230155.GA551305@rfd.leadboat.com>
Comments: In-reply-to Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>
	message dated "Tue, 09 Feb 2021 15:01:55 -0800"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <1477412.1613068373.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2021 13:32:53 -0500
Message-ID: <1477413.1613068373@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

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