| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Álvaro Hernández Tortosa <aht(at)8kdata(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Some thoughts about SCRAM implementation |
| Date: | 2017-04-10 21:09:03 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoYzeCkQ4wucECPiioi4DTjaVkpUU=CoZMLpWu9q2chsGQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 2:32 PM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> That can equally be said about about a lot of features. If we don't
> stop at some point... Also, we're not late in the CF cycle, the CF cycle
> for v10 is over. It's not like the non-existance of channel binding
> removes previously existing features, or makes SCRAM useless.
+1.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Markus Nullmeier | 2017-04-10 21:26:21 | Re: "left shift of negative value" warnings |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2017-04-10 21:06:26 | Re: strange parallel query behavior after OOM crashes |