| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, David Zuelke <dz(at)heroku(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fix for OpenSSL error queue bug |
| Date: | 2016-04-08 01:54:48 |
| Message-ID: | CAB7nPqR6ROjG-w4YjHiE_aVqamxSQhpqfmbPucnbN9Te_uBvNQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 10:23 AM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:
> On 04/07/2016 03:47 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
>>
>> I have looked at this patch. Do we need to worry as well about
>> SSL_shutdown in disconnection code path? I believe that we don't care
>> much if an error happens at this point but we surely should consume
>> any error generated because the SSL context is kept after
>> destroy_ssl_system and another connection attempt may be done using
>> the same SSL context, no?
>
>
> But we are the only user of our SSL context, and we clear the error before
> every call we make (with this patch). The clean up afterwards is only if
> someone else is also using SSL in the same process, and they won't use our
> SSL context.
Argh, yes. Because SSL_free() is directly used. I should read those
docs more carefully.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2016-04-08 02:17:09 | Re: [PATCH v12] GSSAPI encryption support |
| Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2016-04-08 01:36:16 | Re: Fix for OpenSSL error queue bug |