Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] GSSAPI encryption support
To: Robbie Harwood <rharwood@redhat.com>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
References: <jlg1tgq1ktm.fsf@thriss.redhat.com>
 <jlg4mdg8ebw.fsf@thriss.redhat.com> <56BE0FF9.70302@pgmasters.net>
 <jlgtwl9g95m.fsf@thriss.redhat.com>
From: David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>
Message-ID: <56C72591.6000805@pgmasters.net>
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2016 09:24:17 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:38.0)
 Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <jlgtwl9g95m.fsf@thriss.redhat.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512;
 protocol="application/pgp-signature";
 boundary="Vlipwc19JDqoPu9Wq3mGT34dLmNAuJlBb"
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org

This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156)
--Vlipwc19JDqoPu9Wq3mGT34dLmNAuJlBb
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On 2/15/16 12:45 PM, Robbie Harwood wrote:
> David Steele <david@pgmasters.net> writes:
>
>> 1) It didn't apply cleanly to HEAD.  It did apply cleanly on a455878
>> which I figured was recent enough for testing.  I didn't bisect to fin=
d
>> the exact commit that broke it.
>=20
> It applied to head of master (57c932475504d63d8f8a68fc6925d7decabc378a)=

> for me (`patch -p1 < v4-GSSAPI-encryption-support.patch`).  I rebased i=
t
> anyway and cut a v5 anyway, just to be sure.  It's attached, and
> available on github as well:
> https://github.com/frozencemetery/postgres/commit/dc10e3519f0f6c67f79ab=
d157dc8ff1a1c293f53

It could have been my mistake.  I'll give it another try when you have a
new patch.

>> 2) While I was able to apply the patch and get it compiled it seemed
>> pretty flaky - I was only able to logon about 1 in 10 times on average=
=2E
>>  Here was my testing methodology:
>=20
> What I can't tell from looking at your methodology is whether both the
> client and server were running my patches or no.  There's no fallback
> here (I'd like to talk about how that should work, with example from
> v1-v3, if people have ideas).  This means that both the client and the
> server need to be running my patches for the moment.  Is this your
> setup?

I was testing on a system with no version of PostgreSQL installed.  I
applied your patch to master and then ran both server and client from
that patched version.  Is there something I'm missing?

--=20
-David
david@pgmasters.net


--Vlipwc19JDqoPu9Wq3mGT34dLmNAuJlBb
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org
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=yHYI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--Vlipwc19JDqoPu9Wq3mGT34dLmNAuJlBb--