> On Tue, Jun 26, 2001 at 12:20:40AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > We will do double-crypt and everyone will be happy, right?
> > > if the API as above existed, then i would be happy to see "password" go away
> > > (although it should be depreciated to a --enable option, otherwise you are
> > > going to ruin a bunch of existing code).
> > Who is using it? We can continue to allow it but at some point there is
> > no purpose to it unless you have clients that are pre-7.2. Double-crypt
> > removes the use for it, no?
> if the API allows a plain text password, and compares agains a cyrtpo-pg_shadow
> i would imagine that would be fine.
> at this point i should apologize for possibly arguing out of turn.
> if 7.2 has the above, that is cool.
> i'm sorta hoping my mods can make it into 7.1.3, if there is one.
Not a chance. Only major bug fixes in 7.1.X.
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Tatsuo Ishii||Date: 2001-06-26 08:53:04|
|Subject: Re: stuck spin lock with many concurrent users |
|Previous:||From: Jim Mercer||Date: 2001-06-26 04:51:21|
|Subject: Re: Encrypting pg_shadow passwords|