| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, "Jonathan S(dot) Katz" <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Vik Fearing <vik(at)postgresfriends(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: password_encryption default |
| Date: | 2020-05-28 12:53:17 |
| Message-ID: | 91840190-58dd-ee7e-6d82-90b20b74b87a@2ndquadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2020-05-27 15:59, Stephen Frost wrote:
> Agreed- let's remove the legacy options. As I've mentioned elsewhere,
> distros may manage the issue for us, and if we want to get into it, we
> could consider adding support to pg_upgrade to complain if it comes
> across a legacy setting that isn't valid. I'm not sure that's
> worthwhile though.
More along these lines: We could also remove the ENCRYPTED and
UNENCRYPTED keywords from CREATE and ALTER ROLE. AFAICT, these have
never been emitted by pg_dump or psql, so there are no concerns from
that end. Thoughts?
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dave Cramer | 2020-05-28 13:08:19 | Re: SIGSEGV from START_REPLICATION 0/XXXXXXX in XLogSendPhysical () at walsender.c:2762 |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2020-05-28 12:10:33 | Re: password_encryption default |