| From: | Jacob Champion <jacob(dot)champion(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Wolfgang Walther <walther(at)technowledgy(dot)de>, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>, Christoph Berg <myon(at)debian(dot)org>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Nazir Bilal Yavuz <byavuz81(at)gmail(dot)com>, Antonin Houska <ah(at)cybertec(dot)at> |
| Subject: | Re: [PoC] Federated Authn/z with OAUTHBEARER |
| Date: | 2025-04-08 17:19:21 |
| Message-ID: | CAOYmi+kkXK=0AnBxbEhznJZVBZYcPvYPqr8A9+31gmSnzusMOA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Apr 8, 2025 at 10:15 AM Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> Well, if we think we are going to do that, it seems we would need a
> different architecture than the one being proposed for PG 18, which
> could lead to a lot of user/developer API churn.
A major goal of the current patch proposal is to explicitly hide this
from the end-user and public APIs. So it can be changed without public
breakage. It can't be hidden from packagers, of course, but that's the
point of the feature request.
--Jacob
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Nathan Bossart | 2025-04-08 17:22:00 | Re: Horribly slow pg_upgrade performance with many Large Objects |
| Previous Message | Hannu Krosing | 2025-04-08 17:18:31 | Re: Horribly slow pg_upgrade performance with many Large Objects |