Skip to content

Conversation

evkuzin
Copy link

@evkuzin evkuzin commented Aug 7, 2025

Problem
PostgreSQL monitor connections were not respecting the use_ssl setting from pgsql_servers and defaulting to sslmode=prefer. This creates inconsistency between regular client connections and monitor behavior, which is not ideal.

Solution
Modified build_conn_str() in PgSQL_Monitor.cpp to explicitly set:

sslmode=require when use_ssl=1
sslmode=disable when use_ssl=0
This ensures monitor connections behave consistently with the configured SSL settings.

Copy link

@gemini-code-assist gemini-code-assist bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Summary of Changes

Hello @evkuzin, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

I've addressed an inconsistency where PostgreSQL monitor connections were not honoring the use_ssl setting from pgsql_servers, instead defaulting to sslmode=prefer. This pull request resolves this by modifying the connection string builder to explicitly set sslmode=require or sslmode=disable based on the configured use_ssl setting. This ensures that monitor connections behave consistently with other client connections regarding SSL, improving security and predictability.

Highlights

  • PostgreSQL Monitor SSL Consistency: I've modified the build_conn_str() function in lib/PgSQL_Monitor.cpp to ensure that PostgreSQL monitor connections now properly respect the use_ssl setting configured for the server.
  • Explicit SSL Mode Configuration: The build_conn_str() function now explicitly appends sslmode=require to the connection string when use_ssl=1 and sslmode=disable when use_ssl=0, overriding the previous default behavior of sslmode=prefer.
Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point in your pull request via creating an issue comment (i.e. comment on the pull request page) using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands.

Feature Command Description
Code Review /gemini review Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary /gemini summary Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment @gemini-code-assist Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in issue comments and review comments.
Help /gemini help Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments or fill out our survey to provide feedback.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

  1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution.

Copy link

@gemini-code-assist gemini-code-assist bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Code Review

This pull request correctly adds SSL settings to the monitor connection string for PostgreSQL, ensuring consistency with the configured use_ssl setting. The implementation is straightforward and correct. I've suggested a minor refactoring to make the code more concise and align it with the original style of the function, which improves maintainability.

@renecannao
Copy link
Contributor

Can one of the admins verify this patch?

@evkuzin
Copy link
Author

evkuzin commented Aug 7, 2025

@JavierJF sorry if I summon the wrong person, just follow the git blame. Can you take a look?

Copy link

sonarqubecloud bot commented Aug 7, 2025

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants