From: Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: PG Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: libpq with ssl vs psql without
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 16:04:40 +0100
Message-ID: <49199F08.8050302@hagander.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <15027.1226410828@sss.pgh.pa.us>
References: <49198742.2060906@hagander.net>
<15027.1226410828@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Tom Lane wrote:
> Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes:
>> I just noticed that if you have libpq with SSL support, but psql
>> without, we don't print any SSL information at all. Would it be
>> worthwhile to have it print that SSL is in use, even if we can't print
>> the details about the connection?
>
> I think the use-case for this is nonexistent, but you can still sell the
> change on the grounds of reducing the number of #ifdefs.
>
> It might be worth putting a comment in there, because people will wonder
> what the heck this is about.
>
> /* this can only happen if libpq has SSL support and psql doesn't */
Done.
//Magnus
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: magnus@hagander.net, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us
Subject: Re: libpq with ssl vs psql without
In-Reply-To: <49199F08.8050302@hagander.net>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox