| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Jonathan S(dot) Katz" <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Vik Fearing <vik(at)postgresfriends(dot)org>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: password_encryption default |
| Date: | 2020-05-27 06:00:37 |
| Message-ID: | 20200527060037.GA103662@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 10:25:25AM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Yeah, I was too enthusiastic about removing that. Here is a better patch.
+ as an MD5 hash. (<literal>on</literal> is also accepted, as an alias
+ for <literal>md5</literal>.) The default is
+ <literal>scram-sha-256</literal>.
Shouldn't password_encryption = on/true/1/yes be an equivalent of
scram-sha-256 as the default gets changed?
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2020-05-27 06:03:46 | Re: segmentation fault using currtid and partitioned tables |
| Previous Message | Jaime Casanova | 2020-05-27 05:29:39 | Re: segmentation fault using currtid and partitioned tables |