| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Allow tests to pass in OpenSSL FIPS mode |
| Date: | 2023-03-13 10:06:42 |
| Message-ID: | e9b48520-ad90-7edf-04ce-e8f8a7eea90d@enterprisedb.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 06.03.23 17:06, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>> On 6 Mar 2023, at 15:55, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> writes:
>
>>> For readers without all context, wouldn't it be better to encode in the
>>> function name why we're not just calling a hash like md5? Something like
>>> fips_allowed_hash() or similar?
>>
>> I'd prefer shorter than that --- all these queries are laid out on the
>> expectation of a very short function name. Maybe "fipshash()"?
>>
>> We could make the comment introducing the function declarations more
>> elaborate, too.
>
> fipshash() with an explanatory comments sounds like a good idea.
committed like that
(I'm going to close the CF item and revisit the other test suites for
the next release.)
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Daniel Gustafsson | 2023-03-13 10:10:13 | Re: Allow tests to pass in OpenSSL FIPS mode |
| Previous Message | Drouvot, Bertrand | 2023-03-13 09:54:16 | Re: [BUG] pg_stat_statements and extended query protocol |