Re: Serverside SNI support in libpq

From: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>
To: Zsolt Parragi <zsolt(dot)parragi(at)percona(dot)com>
Cc: Michael Banck <mbanck(at)gmx(dot)net>, Jacob Champion <jacob(dot)champion(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Jelte Fennema-Nio <postgres(at)jeltef(dot)nl>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, "li(dot)evan(dot)chao" <li(dot)evan(dot)chao(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Pgsql Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Serverside SNI support in libpq
Date: 2026-03-19 10:38:22
Message-ID: 1CEF92A7-B41A-46A2-BEBA-34307BFE594B@yesql.se
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> On 19 Mar 2026, at 10:55, Zsolt Parragi <zsolt(dot)parragi(at)percona(dot)com> wrote:
>
>> Isn't pg_hosts.conf a really (too) generic name for this
>> feature?
>
> My question earlier about a different key=value format (json5?), was
> related to this, but approached it from a different direction: maybe
> it could be more generic in the future, supporting different settings,
> maybe even in an extensible way? With the current SNI handling already
> relates to multi tenancy, and allowing custom per hosts settings would
> move in the same direction.

Introducing a new config format is for sure an interesting idea, but it's a
much bigger body of work which needs it's own discussion and patchset, it
should not be as part of another feature.

--
Daniel Gustafsson

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message ls7777 2026-03-19 10:50:59 Re: Patch for migration of the pg_commit_ts directory
Previous Message Heikki Linnakangas 2026-03-19 10:31:10 Re: Better shared data structure management and resizable shared data structures