> On 22 Feb 2023, at 18:21, Jonathan S. Katz <jk...@postgresql.org> wrote: > On 2/22/23 8:39 AM, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>> The attached is a rebase on top of master with no other additional hacking >> done >> on top of the above review comments. > > Generally LGTM. I read through earlier comments (sorry I missed replying) and > have nothing to add or object to. Thanks for reviewing! In fixing the CFBot test error in the previous version I realized through off-list discussion that the GUC name was badly chosen. Incorporating the value of another GUC in the name is a bad idea, so the attached version reverts to "scram_iterations=<int>". Should there ever be another SCRAM method standardized (which seems a slim chance to happen before the v17 freeze) we can make a backwards compatible change to "<method>:<iterations> | <iterations>" where the latter is a default for all. Internally the variable contains sha_256 though, that part I think is fine for readability. -- Daniel Gustafsson
v5-0001-Make-SCRAM-iteration-count-configurable.patch
Description: Binary data
