On 10/29/24 05:57, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
On 26 Oct 2024, at 20:10, Joe Conway <m...@joeconway.com> wrote:

Rather than depend on figuring out if we are in FIPS_mode in a portable way, I 
think the GUC is simpler and sufficient. Why not do that and just use a better 
name, e.g. legacy_crypto_enabled or something similar (bike-shedding welcomed) 
as in the attached.

I'm not very enthusiastic about adding a GUC to match a system property like
that for the same reason why we avoid GUCs with transitive dependencies.

Re-reading the thread and thinking about I think the best solution would be to
split these functions off into their own extension.


Seems like that would be an issue for backward comparability and upgrades.

--
Joe Conway
PostgreSQL Contributors Team
RDS Open Source Databases
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com


Reply via email to