On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 8:53 PM Michael Paquier <mich...@paquier.xyz> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 10:38:43AM +0100, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: > > Agreed, and pgcrypto already allows for using sha1. > > > > It seems like any legitimate need for sha1 could be better served by an > > extension rather than supplying it in-core. > > Both of you telling the same thing is enough for me to discard this > new stuff. I'd like to refactor the code anyway as that's a nice > cleanup, and this would have the advantage to make people look at > cryptohashfuncs.c if introducing a new type. After sleeping about it, > I think that I would just make MD5 and SHA1 issue an elog(ERROR) if > the internal routine is taken in those cases, like in the attached. > The refactor patch looks good. It builds and passes make check. Thanks for the enum explanation too. Regards, -- Sehrope Sarkuni Founder & CEO | JackDB, Inc. | https://www.jackdb.com/
