Re: Raising the SCRAM iteration count

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>
Cc: "Jonathan S(dot) Katz" <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Raising the SCRAM iteration count
Date: 2023-03-09 07:09:49
Message-ID: ZAmGPd7mrqv8Waho@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Mar 08, 2023 at 05:21:20PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 08, 2023 at 09:07:36AM +0100, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>> AFAIK a TAP test with psql_interactive is the only way to do this so that's
>> what I've implemented.

I cannot think of a better idea than what you have here, so I am
marking this patch as ready for committer. I am wondering how stable
a logic based on a timer of 5s would be..
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message John Naylor 2023-03-09 07:47:19 Re: Should vacuum process config file reload more often
Previous Message Masahiko Sawada 2023-03-09 06:51:05 Re: [PoC] Improve dead tuple storage for lazy vacuum