Re: [Patch] Mention md5 is deprecated in postgresql.conf.sample

From: Michael Banck <mbanck(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Robert Treat <rob(at)xzilla(dot)net>
Cc: Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [Patch] Mention md5 is deprecated in postgresql.conf.sample
Date: 2025-11-15 14:55:39
Message-ID: 20251115145538.GA10642@caipicrew.dd-dns.de;lightning.caipicrew.dd-dns.de
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

On Sat, Nov 15, 2025 at 09:37:37AM -0500, Robert Treat wrote:
> +1 to the general idea, though I think it should go the other way
> around (it is a small enough grammatical point I'm sure some would
> argue the other way around).
>
> # password_encryption = scram-sha-256 # scram-sha-256 or md5 (deprecated)

I thought about that, but then wondered whether people would think the
whole thing (password_encryption) is deprecated or maybe both
scram-sha-256 and md5?

> Also +1 for backpatching. IIRC this would only show up in new
> clusters, but we're still pretty early on in the cycle, so it seems
> worth it.

Yeah.

Michael

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2025-11-15 15:57:07 Re: should we have a fast-path planning for OLTP starjoins?
Previous Message Robert Treat 2025-11-15 14:37:37 Re: [Patch] Mention md5 is deprecated in postgresql.conf.sample