| From: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Should we back-patch SSL renegotiation fixes? |
| Date: | 2015-06-26 13:58:32 |
| Message-ID: | 558D5A88.4060609@iki.fi |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 06/26/2015 04:53 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 8:03 AM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
>>> I don't accept the argument that there are not ways to tell users
>>> about things they might want to do.
>>
>> We probably could do that. But why would we want to? It's just as much
>> work, and puts the onus on more people?
>
> Because it doesn't force a behavior change down everyone's throat.
It's arguable whether this is a change in behaviour or not. SSL
renegotiation is (supposed to be) completely transparent to the user.
- Heikki
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2015-06-26 13:59:38 | Re: Should we back-patch SSL renegotiation fixes? |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2015-06-26 13:58:22 | Re: Redesigning checkpoint_segments |