Subject: Re: Tightening up allowed custom GUC names
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
References: <951335.1612910077@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <20210209230155.GA551305@rfd.leadboat.com> <1477413.1613068373@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
Message-ID: <b7ef059e-4897-d2c2-62cb-7c5ebdc40f3e@dunslane.net>
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2021 15:04:17 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/78.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1477413.1613068373@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-US
Precedence: bulk


On 2/11/21 1:32 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> 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.
>
> 			


That might be a bit restrictive. I could at least see allowing '-' as
reasonable, and maybe ':'. Not sure about other punctuation characters.
OTOH I'd be surprised if the identifier restriction would burden a large
number of people.


cheers


andrew


--
Andrew Dunstan
EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com