| From: | Zsolt Parragi <zsolt(dot)parragi(at)percona(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jacob Champion <jacob(dot)champion(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)kurilemu(dot)de>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: unclear OAuth error message |
| Date: | 2026-03-23 21:21:31 |
| Message-ID: | CAN4CZFOXdgVT-HQQvjQVushcQtiBovcrLz4ohLtkCKXBWgN_VA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
This is definitely a nice improvement, I only have two minor questions:
- errmsg("internal error in OAuth validator module"));
+ errmsg("internal error in OAuth validator module"),
+ ret->error_detail ? errdetail_log("%s", ret->error_detail) : 0);
+
Isn't including the detail for both the warning and the fatal error
still overly verbose?
+ res->error_detail = error_detail; /* only relevant for failures */
+ if (internal_error)
+ return false;
+
Shouldn't the oauth code include a sanity check to ensure validators
return no error_detail on success instead of silently ignoring it?
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jim Nasby | 2026-03-23 21:35:49 | Re: pg_stat_io_histogram |
| Previous Message | Matheus Alcantara | 2026-03-23 21:03:35 | Re: LLVMJIT: introduce force-inlined functions |