Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: PostgreSQL Password Cracker

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, mlw <pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com>,Devrim GUNDUZ <devrim(at)tr(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL Password Cracker
Date: 2003-01-04 01:08:03
Message-ID: 23571.1041642483@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> But it is a "sect1" in libpq.  It should be a "sect1" somewhere that
> makes more sense.
> ...
> It doesn't belong in libpq, and it doesn't belong in the Programmer's
> Guide.

How could it not belong in libpq?  But you are right that the
Programmer's Guide seems the wrong place for information that is
important to end-users.

Perhaps libpq needs to have a chapter in the User's Guide as well as a
chapter in the Programmer's Guide?  Or maybe we could put the relevant
information into a reference page under PostgreSQL Client Applications
(titled something along the line of "common behavior of all libpq-based
client applications").

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2003-01-04 01:19:20
Subject: Re: Upgrading rant.
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2003-01-04 00:43:45
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL Password Cracker

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group