| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Albe Laurenz <laurenz(dot)albe(at)wien(dot)gv(dot)at> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: support for LDAP URLs |
| Date: | 2012-11-16 15:07:52 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoYg7-z1w5kkohYum9E7=X11om4C8=1dHUUi4RSpP2qnKA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 4:36 AM, Albe Laurenz <laurenz(dot)albe(at)wien(dot)gv(dot)at> wrote:
> What do you think?
> Do we feel bound to adhere to RFC 1823?
Well, I guess if we're already using that piece of ugliness elsewhere
there's not much harm in propagating it here, too. The danger of
course is that these APIs will go away under us and then we'll have to
scramble to come up with a fix, so maybe it would be worth trying to
plan ahead for that, but that's probably a job for a separate patch,
so I'm OK with this one as it is.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Merlin Moncure | 2012-11-16 15:08:51 | Re: Do we need so many hint bits? |
| Previous Message | Merlin Moncure | 2012-11-16 15:00:15 | Re: Do we need so many hint bits? |