| From: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Jonathan S(dot) Katz" <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Alexander Lakhin <exclusion(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Should rolpassword be toastable? |
| Date: | 2024-09-21 20:25:54 |
| Message-ID: | Zu8r0oO0Vi0FxdpB@nathan |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Sep 20, 2024 at 12:27:41PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Nitpick: the message should say "%d bytes" not "%d characters",
> because we're counting bytes. Passes an eyeball check otherwise.
Thanks for reviewing. I went ahead and committed 0002 since it seems like
there's consensus on that one. I've attached a rebased version of 0001
with s/characters/bytes.
--
nathan
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| v4-0001-place-limit-on-password-hash-length.patch | text/plain | 7.0 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2024-09-21 21:25:30 | Re: Add llvm version into the version string |
| Previous Message | Florents Tselai | 2024-09-21 18:48:45 | Re: Docs pg_restore: Shouldn't there be a note about -n ? |