Re: additional contrib test suites
David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>
From: David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>
To: Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>,
pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>,
Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com>
Date: 2017-09-16T12:10:38Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On 9/15/17 6:52 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Sat, Sep 16, 2017 at 5:15 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> >> Noting that mandrill is showing yet a different failure, one that I think >> is inherent to chkpass: >> >> CREATE TABLE test (i int, p chkpass); >> INSERT INTO test VALUES (1, 'hello'), (2, 'goodbye'); >> + WARNING: type chkpass has unstable input conversion for "hello" >> + LINE 1: INSERT INTO test VALUES (1, 'hello'), (2, 'goodbye'); >> + ^ >> + WARNING: type chkpass has unstable input conversion for "goodbye" >> + LINE 1: INSERT INTO test VALUES (1, 'hello'), (2, 'goodbye'); >> + ^ >> >> I'm starting to think that (4) might be the best avenue. Or we could >> consider >> >> (5) drop contrib/chkpass altogether, on the grounds that it's too badly >> designed, and too obsolete crypto-wise, to be useful or supportable. > > crypt() uses the 7 lowest characters, which makes for 7.2e16 values, > so I would be fine with (5), then (4) as the test suite is not > portable. I'd prefer 5, but can go with 4. I get that users need to store their own passwords, but we have support for SHA1 via the crypto module which seems by far the better choice. -- -David david@pgmasters.net
Commits
-
Remove contrib/chkpass
- 5d3cad564729 11.0 landed
-
doc: Clarify pg_inherits description
- 0b554e4e63a4 11.0 cited