| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, samay sharma <smilingsamay(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jacob Champion <pchampion(at)vmware(dot)com>, Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander(at)timescale(dot)com>, andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net, "peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com" <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Proposal: Support custom authentication methods using hooks |
| Date: | 2022-03-17 21:01:55 |
| Message-ID: | 20220317210155.lz64hffrgg2zw5wi@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2022-03-16 18:50:23 -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> First, let's be clear- we aren't actually talking about custom or
> pluggable authentication here, at least when it comes to PG as a
> project. For it to actually be pluggable, it needs to be supported on
> both the client side and the server side, not just the server side.
>
> That this keeps getting swept under the carpet makes me feel like this
> isn't actually an argument about the best way to move the PG project
> forward but rather has another aim.
This is insulting and unjustified. IMO completely inappropriate for the list /
community. I've also brought this up privately, but I thought it important to
state so publically.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jacob Champion | 2022-03-17 21:55:07 | Re: [PATCH] Accept IP addresses in server certificate SANs |
| Previous Message | Thomas Munro | 2022-03-17 20:59:31 | Re: WIP: WAL prefetch (another approach) |