Re: Proposed patch for key managment

From: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Masahiko Sawada <masahiko(dot)sawada(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Proposed patch for key managment
Date: 2020-12-16 16:26:46
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers


* Michael Paquier (michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz) wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 02:09:09PM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > Yeah, looking at what's been done there seems like the right approach to
> > me as well, ideally we'd have one set of APIs that'll support all these
> > use cases (not unlike what curl does..).
> Ooh... This is interesting. What did curl do wrong here? It is
> always good to hear from such past experiences.

Not sure that came across very well- curl did something right in terms
of their vTLS layer which allows for building curl with a number of
different SSL/TLS libraries without the core code having to know about
all the differences. I was suggesting that we might want to look at how
they did that, and naturally discuss with Daniel and ask him what
thoughts he has from having worked with curl and the vTLS layer.



In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2020-12-16 17:07:08 Re: SELECT INTO deprecation
Previous Message Heikki Linnakangas 2020-12-16 15:46:33 Re: ResourceOwner refactoring