Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1wSBno-0031Cz-0s for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Wed, 27 May 2026 10:47:57 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1wSBnm-007tOP-0f for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Wed, 27 May 2026 10:47:55 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1wSBnl-007tOH-2f for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Wed, 27 May 2026 10:47:54 +0000 Received: from smtp.outgoing.loopia.se ([93.188.3.37]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.98.2) (envelope-from ) id 1wSBnk-00000001g4N-3Tg7 for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Wed, 27 May 2026 10:47:54 +0000 Received: from s807.loopia.se (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by s807.loopia.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F9AC611524 for ; Wed, 27 May 2026 12:47:43 +0200 (CEST) Received: from s979.loopia.se (unknown [172.22.191.5]) by s807.loopia.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70D7E61140B; Wed, 27 May 2026 12:47:43 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost (unknown [172.22.191.5]) by s979.loopia.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6EC5110BC41E; Wed, 27 May 2026 12:47:43 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavis at amavis.loopia.se X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.2 tagged_above=-999 required=6.2 tests=[ALL_TRUSTED=-1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1] autolearn=disabled Authentication-Results: s470.loopia.se (amavis); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=yesql.se Received: from s981.loopia.se ([172.22.191.5]) by localhost (s470.loopia.se [172.22.190.34]) (amavis, port 10024) with LMTP id UG27w6dykuZ7; Wed, 27 May 2026 12:47:43 +0200 (CEST) X-Loopia-Auth: user X-Loopia-User: daniel@yesql.se X-Loopia-Originating-IP: 89.255.232.236 Received: from smtpclient.apple (customer-89-255-232-236.stosn.net [89.255.232.236]) (Authenticated sender: daniel@yesql.se) by s981.loopia.se (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D1C7922B1774; Wed, 27 May 2026 12:47:42 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yesql.se; s=loopiadkim1707475645; t=1779878862; bh=2tm5Gv7eCelofRqk0lY0PnTh3qzMklmkcIBALOoL5m0=; h=Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=ArC+c1nkt4B18lEDF9LDD9ZsGFIfsESQUA5se7xhJDxvyRPYwHjI8ZTeUIfHHzfmS TkrY0CEZ1dLWG8h3sDNL2sOgqZ8i9xewlcjPCeEkOmkEoDU75Y/oObIaTqwufm1VoH zCGS/MtSUooDsegmJk3uvlRzI9gmfQTLpEtV3dSOKBv9b0cp6V+WQAeRLgyK0sUwAd Djlnr8Hq39ZKmsvM0YpsyraN+8PIWvJsHA2v6Stz24+W0xWTsR5K3fL422sUzntxPP k7Du+PpFfmXrGkUpelKC5P6W6A1bobRaX49KxSUPZe/mlXWKPUj/s3mhrpG5HFB8UI tFgk9ZVW19gEg== Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3776.700.51.11.12\)) Subject: Re: PostgreSQL and OpenSSL 4.0.0 From: Daniel Gustafsson In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 27 May 2026 12:47:32 +0200 Cc: Tom Lane , PostgreSQL-development Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <65C5DC15-DE27-4D36-8AEE-A854C23B3834@yesql.se> <898414.1778192534@sss.pgh.pa.us> <1A5104C0-E9EF-4D90-9627-23D3D909104B@yesql.se> <95045A62-9A81-4AD8-BA25-D8648BD68499@yesql.se> To: Michael Paquier X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3776.700.51.11.12) List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Archived-At: Precedence: bulk > On 27 May 2026, at 02:06, Michael Paquier wrote: >=20 > On Tue, May 26, 2026 at 10:16:40AM +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: >> I have plans for fixing this in v20 but for 14-19 there isn't much we = can do >> except unconstifying. >=20 > Indeed, no objections regarding that for the stable branches. Thanks for confirming. I am currently re-testing all the combinations = of stable postgres branches and supported OpenSSL and LibreSSL versions. > For v20, it sounds to me that cutting through the set of versions of > OpenSSL supported should make the situation much saner, even if the > range of changes seems to be limited due to the LibreSSL story. Not to thread-jack myself, but. I have a WIP patch for v20 which = separates the code into {fe|be}-secure-openssl.c and {fe[be}-secure-libressl such that = we can start modernizing our OpenSSL code without breaking LibreSSL or risk = ending up with an impenetrable ifdef soup. Will share shortly to get a discussion = going for how we want to deal with TLS support in 20 and onwards. -- Daniel Gustafsson