Re: Let people set host(no)ssl settings from initdb

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: Ibrar Ahmed <ibrar(dot)ahmad(at)gmail(dot)com>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>, Cary Huang <cary(dot)huang(at)highgo(dot)ca>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Let people set host(no)ssl settings from initdb
Date: 2021-03-09 00:47:11
Message-ID: YEbFjwjThcHSv38z@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Mar 08, 2021 at 06:13:14PM -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> What is the point of doing that if we're going to reject the patch as
> discussed upthread?

I have read again this thread, and still understand that this is the
consensus that has been reached. The CF entry has been updated to
reflect that.
--
Michael

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jacob Champion 2021-03-09 00:48:20 Re: Proposal: Save user's original authenticated identity for logging
Previous Message tsunakawa.takay@fujitsu.com 2021-03-09 00:34:42 RE: Implementing Incremental View Maintenance