| From: | Jacob Champion <jacob(dot)champion(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)kurilemu(dot)de>, Michael Banck <mbanck(at)gmx(dot)net>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Time to drop RADIUS support? |
| Date: | 2026-01-23 17:50:40 |
| Message-ID: | CAOYmi+kwVHbra-80wSC7Rh9OGttdd8QFV+VcBtSNkEkux6XkyQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Jan 23, 2026 at 8:30 AM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> > I don't think removing it entirely from all back branches is a good
> > idea, without first making sure that there are no users.
>
> Agreed, we can't pull it from the back branches. But I'm in favor of
> pulling it from HEAD if we document how to use PAM-based RADIUS
> instead. I agree with Thomas' argument that the cost-benefit ratio
> of fixing our implementation would be poor.
+1.
I still think a WARNING in the back branches would be a kindness, to
let people know that they need to move.
--Jacob
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Nikita Malakhov | 2026-01-23 18:00:11 | Unstable path in index regress test query |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2026-01-23 17:33:26 | Re: alignas (C11) |