Re: SSL renegotiation

Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>

From: Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2013-11-15T15:49:50Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On 2013-11-15 10:43:23 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> +1 to waiting awhile.  I think if we don't see any problems in
> HEAD, then back-patching as-is would be the best solution.
> The other alternatives are essentially acknowledging that you're
> back-patching something you're afraid isn't production ready.
> Let's not go there.

Agreed. Both on just backpatching it unchanged and waiting for the fix
to prove itself a bit.

> Another reason I'm not in a hurry is that the problem we're trying
> to solve doesn't seem to be causing real-world trouble.  So by
> "awhile", I'm thinking "let's let it get through 9.4 beta testing".

Well, there have been a bunch of customer complaints about it, afair
that's what made Alvaro look into it in the first place. So it's not a
victimless bug.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

-- 
 Andres Freund	                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services


Commits

  1. Well, the discussion about SSL a bit back perked my interest and I did