Sent from my iPhone
> On Apr 6, 2025, at 11:23 AM, Álvaro Herrera <alvhe...@alvh.no-ip.org> wrote: > > On 2025-Apr-06, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > >> On 2025-03-28 Fr 10:43 AM, Nathan Bossart wrote: > >>> Taking a step back, are we sure that 1) this is the right place to do these >>> checks and 2) we shouldn't apply the same restrictions to all names? I'm >>> wondering if it would be better to add these checks to the grammar instead >>> of trying to patch up all the various places they are used in the tree. >> >> Maybe. I don't think there is time for that for v18, so we'd have to defer >> this for now. I can live with that - it's been like this for a long time. > > Grumble. I'd rather introduce a partial restriction now only for names > that affect the tools failing outright (pg_dumpall in particular), than > do nothing for this release. If we feel the need to extend the > restriction later, that's easy to do and bothers nobody. We've wanted > these characters to be forbidden on database names for a long time, but > nobody has cared as much for their use on other types of names. I'm not > even sure we'd support the idea of forbidding them on all names (though > the SQL standard doesn't allow control chars in identifiers.) Ok. That seems reasonable, let’s do this now and revisit in the v19 cycle Cheers Andrew
