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

Re: Unfriendly handling of pg_hba SSL options with SSL off

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Unfriendly handling of pg_hba SSL options with SSL off
Date: 2011-04-25 23:26:22
Message-ID: 4DB6031E.9040705@dunslane.net (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 04/25/2011 07:18 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut<peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>  writes:
>> On mån, 2011-04-25 at 15:26 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Well, it's not just to be "helpful", it's to close off code paths that
>>> are never going to be sufficiently well-tested to not have bizarre
>>> failure modes.  That helps both developers (who don't have to worry
>>> about testing/fixing such code paths) and users (who won't have to
>>> deal with the bizarre failure modes).
>> That's of course another good reason.
> Hm, does that mean we have consensus on treating it as an error?
> If not, would some other people care to cast votes?
>
> 			

+1 for error.

cheers

andrew

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Robert HaasDate: 2011-04-25 23:27:25
Subject: Re: wrong hint message for ALTER FOREIGN TABLE
Previous:From: Andrew DunstanDate: 2011-04-25 23:25:02
Subject: XML with invalid chars

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