| From: | Jacob Champion <jacob(dot)champion(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Marko Kreen <markokr(at)gmail(dot)com>, Adrian Klaver <adrian(dot)klaver(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> |
| Subject: | Re: ecdh support causes unnecessary roundtrips |
| Date: | 2025-03-04 19:13:34 |
| Message-ID: | CAOYmi+nTwu7=aUGCkf6L-ULqS8itNP7uc9nUmNLOvbXf2TCgBA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Jul 29, 2024 at 3:26 PM Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> wrote:
> > On 17 Jun 2024, at 19:56, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> > On 2024-06-17 19:51:45 +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>
> >> Changing the default of the ecdh GUC would perhaps be doable?
> >
> > I was wondering whether we could change the default so that it accepts both
> > x25519 and secp256r1. Unfortunately that seems to requires changing what we
> > use to set the parameter...
>
> Right. The patch in https://commitfest.postgresql.org/48/5025/ does allow for
> accepting both but that's a different discussion.
Just a reminder that, if we do want to change this for 18 onward, the
window is closing. Adding x25519 to the default groups seems like a
good idea to me, whether we can get something backpatched or not.
Thanks,
--Jacob
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Álvaro Herrera | 2025-03-04 19:18:12 | Re: bogus error message for ALTER TABLE ALTER CONSTRAINT |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2025-03-04 19:09:24 | Re: scalability bottlenecks with (many) partitions (and more) |