| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: PQgetssl() and alternative SSL implementations |
| Date: | 2014-08-19 23:11:46 |
| Message-ID: | 23201.1408489906@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> On 2014-08-20 00:58:22 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>> I don't much like adding a separate function for every SSL implementation,
>> but you've got a point that it would be nice to make it difficult to call
>> PQgetSSLstruct() and just assume that the returned struct is e.g an OpenSSL
>> struct, while it's actually something else. Perhaps:
> A good reason to not have functions with the respective functions is
> that it requires either including the relevant headers or adding forward
> declarations of the libraries type.
It requires no such thing. What we do for PQgetssl() is declare it as
returning "void *", and we could easily do the same for other libraries.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2014-08-19 23:24:44 | Re: PQgetssl() and alternative SSL implementations |
| Previous Message | Claudio Freire | 2014-08-19 23:10:20 | Re: Extended Prefetching using Asynchronous IO - proposal and patch |