From: | "Dave Page" <dpage(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | "Pavel Stehule" <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: WIP: plpgsql source code obfuscation |
Date: | 2008-01-28 14:34:06 |
Message-ID: | 937d27e10801280634t5e6fefd9k5433828b9dcc11b7@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-patches |
On Jan 28, 2008 2:26 PM, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> sure, but do you know, Tom dislikes new columns in pg_proc :).
Tom doesn't seem to like the idea of obfuscation of function code much
either :-)
> This
> patch is usable sample of one possible solution and doesn't need
> initdb. And there is dependency on pgcrypto :(. But it is simply and
> it does all what is expected. Some customers wonted it. But I am not
> sure if similar patch can be accepted - this is prototype. And when
> I'll have some signals so patch can be commited I'll send final
> version with obfuscate col in pg_proc. Any patch of pg_proc needs two
> hours of work, and any change needs actualization - so lot of maybe
> useless work.
Yeah, I realise tweaking pg_proc is a large job, and wouldn't expect
you to necessarily do it immediately - I just wanted to throw my
requirements from a tools perspective into the inevitable discussion.
Cheers, Dave.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2008-01-28 14:40:41 | Re: WIP: plpgsql source code obfuscation |
Previous Message | Pavel Stehule | 2008-01-28 14:26:54 | Re: WIP: plpgsql source code obfuscation |