MIME-Version: 1.0
References: 
 <CAN4CZFM3b8u5uNNNsY6XCya257u+Dofms3su9f11iMCxvCacag@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAE2r8H55geNFtECuFunpgn0LJK2+rntGuTeqNr6mP7gGhWFRbA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAN4CZFP_2fe2-18wUoXDZodV8suVe9o++pv=hP8KxxvWkmCx7A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOYmi+kMuA7t9ao6rWZ=5kn_Zmd7qtwOay_ocEBXwkzKWbefhQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAOYmi+kMuA7t9ao6rWZ=5kn_Zmd7qtwOay_ocEBXwkzKWbefhQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Zsolt Parragi <zsolt.parragi@percona.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2025 23:52:57 +0000
Message-ID: 
 <CAN4CZFNyTPuHnUKJH-n5AaKoi+d6bGJjnWaNzqToLWjLBBJjpg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Custom oauth validator options
To: Jacob Champion <jacob.champion@enterprisedb.com>
Cc: VASUKI M <vasukianand0119@gmail.com>,
	PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>,
 david.g.johnston@gmail.com,
	Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, myon@debian.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAN4CZFNyTPuHnUKJH-n5AaKoi%2Bd6bGJjnWaNzqToLWjLBBJjpg%40mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

> I forgot to mention in my reply to Zsolt, but we've supported inline
> inclusions in HBA for a few releases now. (I just frequently forget
> they exist.)

Thanks, I didn't know about that feature, that solves half of my problem.

> What's the case where a user has multiple HBA lines that
> all want to use unrelated claims for authentication to one Postgres
> cluster? Is this multi-tenancy, or...?

For configuring the authn matching yes, the use case is multitenancy.

But for some other variables that we didn't implement yet, this could
be useful even without multitenancy.

One thing I mentioned in the previous email is the client id
validation. A practical use case of that would be restricting which
oauth clients can login to which database. I can't use a SUSET
variable with a check restricting it to ALTER DATABASE, because
database level variables are not yet available during the oauth
validator callback. I could use a login event trigger, but that seems
like a bad hack to me.