| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Álvaro Hernández Tortosa <aht(at)8kdata(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [JDBC] [HACKERS] Channel binding support for SCRAM-SHA-256 |
| Date: | 2017-12-28 07:19:00 |
| Message-ID: | 20171228071900.GA26798@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-jdbc |
On Wed, Dec 27, 2017 at 09:27:40AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 26, 2017 at 03:28:09PM -0500, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> On 12/22/17 03:10, Michael Paquier wrote:
>>> Second thoughts on 0002 as there is actually no need to move around
>>> errorMessage if the PGconn* pointer is saved in the SCRAM status data
>>> as both are linked. The attached simplifies the logic even more.
>>>
>>
>> That all looks pretty reasonable.
>
> Thanks for the review. Don't you think that the the refactoring
> simplifications should be done first though? This would result in
> producing the patch set in reverse order. I'll be fine to produce them
> if need be.
Well, here is a patch set doing the reverse operation: refactoring does
first in 0001 and support for tls-server-end-point is in 0002. Hope this
helps.
--
Michael
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| 0001-Refactor-channel-binding-code-to-fetch-cbind_data-on.patch | text/plain | 25.6 KB |
| 0002-Implement-channel-binding-tls-server-end-point-for-S.patch | text/plain | 11.4 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Fabien COELHO | 2017-12-28 07:52:08 | Re: [HACKERS] pgbench more operators & functions |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2017-12-28 06:30:04 | Re: Getting rid of "tuple concurrently updated" elog()s with concurrent DDLs (at least ALTER TABLE) |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Vladimir Sitnikov | 2018-01-02 18:58:29 | [pgjdbc/pgjdbc] 0d31d4: fix: throw TOO_MANY_RESULTS (0100E) instead of "Pg... |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2017-12-27 00:27:40 | Re: [JDBC] [HACKERS] Channel binding support for SCRAM-SHA-256 |