| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Russell Smith <mr-russ(at)pws(dot)com(dot)au>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, PoolSnoopy <tlatzelsberger(at)gmx(dot)at>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Re: [BUGS] libpq does not manage SSL callbacks properly when other libraries are involved. |
| Date: | 2008-11-18 16:20:50 |
| Message-ID: | 20380.1227025250@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> This is not something we would typically backpatch because of the danger
>> of introducing some unexpected change in libpq. We can provide a patch
>> to anyone who needs it, or if the community wants it backpatched I can
>> certainly do that.
> It isn't? It does seem like a bug, which we do typically backpatch ...
Well, it's a risk-reward tradeoff. In this case it seems like there's
a nontrivial risk of creating new bugs against fixing a problem that
evidently affects very few people. I concur with Bruce's feeling that
we shouldn't backpatch ... at least not now. Once the patch has been
through beta testing we could reconsider.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Juan | 2008-11-18 23:52:05 | BUG #4538: shared memory |
| Previous Message | Dave Page | 2008-11-18 13:01:40 | Per database connection limit buglet |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Paul Schlie | 2008-11-18 16:27:13 | Re: Block-level CRC checks |
| Previous Message | Pavel Stehule | 2008-11-18 16:20:27 | Re: is any reason why only one columns subselect are allowed in array()? |