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

Re: PQinitSSL broken in some use casesf

From: Andrew Chernow <ac(at)esilo(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: PQinitSSL broken in some use casesf
Date: 2009-03-30 14:59:04
Message-ID: 49D0DE38.10306@esilo.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
>> Tom Lane wrote:
>>> It sounds like everyone has converged on agreeing that this way is okay
>>> for 8.4?  Object now or hold your peace ...
> 
>> What are we doing with PQinitSSL()?
> 
> Nothing, except improving the documentation.
> 
> 

My patch didn't change the docs at all.  I wasn't sure what to do there. 
  However, I did change the implementation but left behavior alone.  It 
now calls PQinitSecure(do_init, do_init);

-- 
Andrew Chernow
eSilo, LLC
every bit counts
http://www.esilo.com/

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Jaime CasanovaDate: 2009-03-30 14:59:05
Subject: Re: Partitioning feature ...
Previous:From: Robert HaasDate: 2009-03-30 14:57:57
Subject: Re: psql \d* and system objects

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