Horton

Re: Add SQL function for SHA1

Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>

View thread
From: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
To: Kenneth Marshall <ktm@rice.edu>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>, Sehrope Sarkuni <sehrope@jackdb.com>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2021-01-26T04:27:28Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →

  1. Refactor SQL functions of SHA-2 in cryptohashfuncs.c

On Mon, Jan 25, 2021 at 10:23:30PM -0600, Kenneth Marshall wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 01:06:29PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 25, 2021 at 10:42:25PM -0500, Sehrope Sarkuni wrote:
> > > +1 to adding a SHA1 SQL function. Even if it's deprecated, there's plenty
> > > of historical usage that I can see it being useful.
> > 
> > Let's wait for more opinions to see if we agree that this addition is
> > helpful or not.  Even if this is not added, I think that there is
> > still value in refactoring the code anyway for the SHA-2 functions.
> > 
> 
> +1 I know that it has been deprecated, but it can be very useful when
> working with data from pre-deprecation. :) It is annoying to have to
> resort to plperl or plpython because it is not available. The lack or
> orthogonality is painful.

Yes, I think having SHA1 makes sense --- there are probably still valid
uses for it.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        https://momjian.us
  EDB                                      https://enterprisedb.com

  The usefulness of a cup is in its emptiness, Bruce Lee