On Thu, Mar 09, 2023 at 09:51:09AM -0500, Stephen Frost wrote: > I agree with matching how SSL is handled here and in a review of the > patch proposed didn't see any issues with it. Seems like it's probably > something that should also be back-patched and it doesn't look terribly > risky to do so, is there a specific risk that you see?
Nothing specific per se, just my usual be-careful-with-slight-behavior-changes-with-libpq-parameters. Perhaps you are right and there is no actual reason to worry here. -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
