On Mon, Dec 31, 2018 at 10:20:28AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> I am attaching an updated patch. I'll do an extra pass on it in the
> next couple of days and commit if there is nothing. The diff stats
> are nice:
> 32 files changed, 60 insertions(+), 1181 deletions(-)
And committed.
--
Michae
On Mon, Dec 31, 2018 at 10:20:28AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 30, 2018 at 11:47:03AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Not the fault of this patch, but surely this bit in pgcrypto's
>> pad_eme_pkcs1_v15()
>>
>> if (!pg_strong_random((char *) p, 1))
>> {
>>
On Sun, Dec 30, 2018 at 11:47:03AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Michael Paquier writes:
> > And attached is an updated patch with all those fixes included. Any
> > thoughts or opinions?
>
> contrib/pgcrypto has some variant expected-files for the no-strong-random
> case that could be removed now.
>
On Sun, Dec 30, 2018 at 11:56:48AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Oh, one more thought: the removal of the --disable-strong-random
> documentation stanza means there's no explanation of what to do
> to build on platforms without /dev/urandom. Perhaps something
> like this in installation.sgml:
>
>
I wrote:
> LGTM otherwise.
Oh, one more thought: the removal of the --disable-strong-random
documentation stanza means there's no explanation of what to do
to build on platforms without /dev/urandom. Perhaps something
like this in installation.sgml:
- You need OpenSSL, if you want to
Michael Paquier writes:
> And attached is an updated patch with all those fixes included. Any
> thoughts or opinions?
contrib/pgcrypto has some variant expected-files for the no-strong-random
case that could be removed now.
BackendRandomLock should be removed, too.
Since pg_strong_random is de
On Sun, Dec 30, 2018 at 04:15:49PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 30, 2018 at 01:45:42AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Hah, I was just about to work on that myself --- glad I didn't get
>> to it quite yet. A couple of thoughts:
>>
>> 1. Surely there's documentation about --disable-strong
On Sun, Dec 30, 2018 at 01:45:42AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Hah, I was just about to work on that myself --- glad I didn't get
> to it quite yet. A couple of thoughts:
>
> 1. Surely there's documentation about --disable-strong-random
> to clean up too?
Oops, I forgot to grep on this one. Remov
Michael Paquier writes:
> Attached is a patch to clean up the code, which removes all the code
> specific to random generation for backends (no more shmem code paths
> and such), as well as the pg_frontend_random() and
> pg_backend_random(). Thoughts or opinions?
Hah, I was just about to work on
Hi all
As mentioned here, there has been a discussion about $subject and the
fact that it may be rather useless:
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/21150.1546010...@sss.pgh.pa.us
--disable-strong-random is also untested in the buildfarm.
Attached is a patch to clean up the code, which removes
10 matches
Mail list logo
