public inbox for [email protected]  
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jacob Champion <[email protected]>
To: Zsolt Parragi <[email protected]>
Cc: Nikolay Shaplov <[email protected]>
Cc: Álvaro Herrera <[email protected]>
Cc: VASUKI M <[email protected]>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: Robert Haas <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Custom oauth validator options
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 2026 15:16:55 -0700
Message-ID: <CAOYmi+=WsZ6rKe5vfa5mENzg-LkOjuepubcN-+e_bQgB8WDYEw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAN4CZFPCHdY2j1+EHDhU+G+8+bp_jXh3Jqqf+2wqeYDBiQbjVA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAN4CZFPmF9fGOcFubwOxqXymhVo_RvbUx3bLoYQcfk=f0mwECw@mail.gmail.com>
	<[email protected]>
	<CAN4CZFPUfTj-BF-m5=F7_MnY_T3+Qh-DuG7N7ojdbJDkT8JHeA@mail.gmail.com>
	<[email protected]>
	<CAN4CZFMCh3vOWGPbU5pTB-bwnoAtgFuDJmGGv7z7xeez+WJiag@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAN4CZFMGwGdMnxP07Rk2qrC9eGQt31Lrerrnk66vQuzRhDEwiw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAOYmi+nTXGcroZD_Mnkc8LYWYFbfDYNR4ML_yQ5sF9+DY2amcg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAN4CZFMxQzFD0ZJS7pX5Ajdei7TmpROEZKG5vxmfmhCQEQX3fA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAOYmi+mUdsTODm0F8PWBQYcCQPBKvHUAieXgoP1pWXtEA2N9Aw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAN4CZFOdfRKjmpsDHWG_3Qgtmkcd41GFBH1uenC9-5yUj=hBzA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAOYmi+nUCSoMuQBm+2z_-98mMB6F5SDABA2X8CMoo==5O4v13A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAOYmi+k4fuYKJBW0GuCZFWOz3w+0t=X9zeHFx2avr3=kdpopQw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAOYmi+=_otQRpW4L2VZms4dzF12_0fTJREBWEUOApmAaxSJ8bA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAN4CZFPCHdY2j1+EHDhU+G+8+bp_jXh3Jqqf+2wqeYDBiQbjVA@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Apr 6, 2026 at 3:09 PM Zsolt Parragi <[email protected]> wrote:
> > I believe this is now a complete patch
> > proposal; tear it apart. :D
>
> The patch looks good to me as is, I don't see any real issues with it,

Great! I am prepping for a commit Sometime Very Soon.

> maybe one cosmetic question in the test.
>
> + if (GetOAuthHBAOption(state, "log"))
> + elog(LOG, "%s", GetOAuthHBAOption(state, "log"));
> +
>
> If we treat the test code as an example for real implementations,

(It's not, though -- my test code is frequently abusive on purpose and
should not be used as best-practice. If we want compilable sample
code, that looks different from tests IMHO.)

> this
> and the other use could cache the option in a local variable instead
> of making duplicate calls, following the pattern of the documentation.

In this case, I want the test to pin the behavior that multiple calls
should work as you'd expect.

Thanks,
--Jacob





view thread (25+ messages)

reply

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: [email protected]
  Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
  Subject: Re: Custom oauth validator options
  In-Reply-To: <CAOYmi+=WsZ6rKe5vfa5mENzg-LkOjuepubcN-+e_bQgB8WDYEw@mail.gmail.com>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox