Re: Remove psql's -W option

From: David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Vik Fearing <vik(dot)fearing(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Remove psql's -W option
Date: 2018-07-23 15:28:10
Message-ID: 20180723152810.GJ29917@fetter.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 11:20:46AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 9:35 AM, Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> wrote:
> > Otherwise ISTM that "-W/--password" still has some minimal value thus does
> > not deserve to be thrown out that quickly.
>
> I think I agree. I don't think this option is really hurting
> anything, so I'm not quite sure why we would want to abruptly get rid
> of it.
>
> I also think your other question is a good one. It seems like the
> fact that we need to reconnect -- rather than just prompting for the
> password and then sending it when we get it -- is an artifact of how
> libpq is designed rather than an intrinsic limitation of the protocol.

Am I understanding correctly that doing the following would be
acceptable, assuming good code quality?

- Rearrange libpq so it doesn't force this behavior.
- Deprecate the -W option uniformly in the code we ship by documenting
it and making it send warnings to stderr.

Best,
David.
--
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778

Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2018-07-23 15:29:33 Re: BUG #15182: Canceling authentication due to timeout aka Denial of Service Attack
Previous Message Andres Freund 2018-07-23 15:26:36 Re: How can we submit code patches that implement our (pending) patents?