From: | "Marko Kreen" <markokr(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Greg Sabino Mullane" <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [GENERAL] SHA1 on postgres 8.3 |
Date: | 2008-01-21 08:08:38 |
Message-ID: | e51f66da0801210008h55fa97f7g1968e1daaac2ce12@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
On 1/20/08, Greg Sabino Mullane <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com> wrote:
> In summary: what would objections be to my writing a sha1() patch?
Well.
If you do start adding hashes to core then _please_ pick a path
that allows having all the standard hashes in advance. That means
both md5 and sha-1, sha2 (4 hashes) and there is also sha-3 in the
horizon.
Basically there seems to be 2 variants:
1) Continue the md5() style: md5(), sha1(), sha224(), sha256(),
sha384(), sha512(), plus another 4 for SHA-3.
2) Move hashing functions from pgcrypto to core. That means
digest() and I would suggest hmac() and crypt() too.
I'm also starting to think it may be worth having hexdigest().
I prefer 2). There is some common infrastructure in pgcrypto,
the hash specific parts can be either split out or rewritten
from scratch, hashes need very small amount of code.
I agree that having all of pgcrypto in core is bit overkill,
so please don't think of it as all-or-nothing affair.
--
marko
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2008-01-21 08:10:43 | Re: Sun acquires MySQL |
Previous Message | Florian Weimer | 2008-01-21 07:53:14 | Re: [GENERAL] SHA1 on postgres 8.3 |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | David Fetter | 2008-01-21 10:38:40 | Re: Bug in psql/enum |
Previous Message | Florian Weimer | 2008-01-21 07:53:14 | Re: [GENERAL] SHA1 on postgres 8.3 |