On 17/12/2025 11:03, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
On 12/12/2025 13:41, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
I wonder if the way forward is to do both?  Heikki has a good point that when working with pg_hosts.conf it should be clear from just that file what the final config will be, and in the previous version that wasn't the case since the ssl_snimode GUC set operation modes.  At the same time, Jacob has a point that overriding configuration just because pg_hosts exists isn't transparent.

Adding a boolean GUC which turns ph_hosts (and thus SNI) on or off can perhaps fix both complaints?  If the GUC is on, pg_hosts - and only pg_hosts - is used for configuring secrets.  By using the * fallback and no_sni rule in pg_hosts all variations of configs can be achieved.  If the GUC is off, then the regular
SSL GUCs are used and pg_host is never considered (and thus SNI is not
possible).

Such a GUC wouldn't make the patch all that much different from what it is
right now. What do you think about that middleground proposal?

I like that.

Instead of a boolean GUC, it could perhaps be a path to the pg_hosts file. I haven't thought this through but somehow it feels more natural to me than a "read this file or not" setting.

I was thinking that the boolean GUC would be called something like "read_pg_hosts_file = on / off", which feels unnatural. But thinking about this more, if the GUC is called something like "enable_sni = on / off", that feels much better, and I like that more than my suggestion of specifying the path to the pg_hosts file.

- Heikki



Reply via email to