MIME-Version: 1.0
References: 
 <CAN4CZFPmF9fGOcFubwOxqXymhVo_RvbUx3bLoYQcfk=f0mwECw@mail.gmail.com>
 <202601281620.m3hrqtih5b2w@alvherre.pgsql>
 <CAN4CZFPUfTj-BF-m5=F7_MnY_T3+Qh-DuG7N7ojdbJDkT8JHeA@mail.gmail.com>
 <fd412b8e-fab5-43fe-b18d-3e035e4998a7@nataraj.su>
 <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>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAN4CZFPCHdY2j1+EHDhU+G+8+bp_jXh3Jqqf+2wqeYDBiQbjVA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Jacob Champion <jacob.champion@enterprisedb.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 2026 15:16:55 -0700
Message-ID: 
 <CAOYmi+=WsZ6rKe5vfa5mENzg-LkOjuepubcN-+e_bQgB8WDYEw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Custom oauth validator options
To: Zsolt Parragi <zsolt.parragi@percona.com>
Cc: Nikolay Shaplov <dhyan@nataraj.su>,
 =?UTF-8?Q?=C3=81lvaro_Herrera?= <alvherre@kurilemu.de>,
	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"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAOYmi%2B%3DWsZ6rKe5vfa5mENzg-LkOjuepubcN-%2Be_bQgB8WDYEw%40mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Apr 6, 2026 at 3:09=E2=80=AFPM Zsolt Parragi <zsolt.parragi@percona=
.com> 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