On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 3:26 PM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > One missing part of that is that we'd need to support bind parameters > for utility statements, eg new password in ALTER USER. That's been > on the wish list for a long time anyway, of course. I think it's > mostly a matter of lack of round tuits, rather than any fundamental > problem. (Parameters in transaction control statements might have > fundamental problems, but we can just dismiss that as out of scope.)
I might be wrong, but isn't this, like, a ton of work? All the places in the DDL grammar that currently accept string literals would have to be changed to also allow parameters, and then the downstream code would need to be adjusted to look through those parameters to find the corresponding values. Or is there a less painful approach? -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
