Re: Adding support for SSLKEYLOGFILE in the frontend

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>
To: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Jacob Champion <jacob(dot)champion(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Abhishek Chanda <abhishek(dot)becs(at)gmail(dot)com>, Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Adding support for SSLKEYLOGFILE in the frontend
Date: 2025-06-29 10:56:40
Message-ID: 0f003fd4-3e38-4d93-8671-3cc21feda651@eisentraut.org
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 27.06.25 11:15, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>> On 26 Jun 2025, at 23:06, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> wrote:
>
>> I'll propose changes for these comments in the morning when coffee has been
>> had.
>
> The attached moves to logging on stderr along with a test for this, and also
> removes the WARNING prefix that was added to the other stderr loggings since
> that seems out of place compared to other stderr loggings in libpq (the
> sslpassword trunction WARNING is clearly warranted, these were not).

Hmm, I thought the WARNING prefixes were good. I think these are similar to

"WARNING: password file \"%s\" is not a plain file\n"

in that something during the connection setup is being ignored.

Otherwise, if you just write something but don't tag it with something
like warning or error, it's not clear how the user is supposed to
interpret it. Is it a progress message, is it something bad, etc.?

> The umask
> call is removed as it's not required, and a little bit of whitespace cleanup
> from the original commit performed. Re macros for file modes, this is for
> fopen and not open though, or am I missing something?

It looks like the conventions around the code are mixed. 0600 is clear
enough that we can keep it.

I don't think this is necessary:

+ errno = 0;

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jiří Kavalík 2025-06-29 16:05:45 Re: [PATCH] Support for basic ALTER TABLE progress reporting.
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2025-06-29 10:43:41 Re: Collation & ctype method table, and extension hooks