[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       pgsql-bugs
Subject:    Re: [BUGS] ltree::text not immutable?
From:       Alvaro Herrera <alvherre () 2ndquadrant ! com>
Date:       2014-10-27 15:32:59
Message-ID: 20141027153259.GV1791 () alvin ! alvh ! no-ip ! org
[Download RAW message or body]

Tom Lane wrote:

> Not entirely sure what to do about this.  It seems like for the purposes
> of contrib/chkpass, it's a good thing that chkpass_in() won't reuse the
> same salt.  Weak as a 12-bit salt might be nowadays, it's still better
> than no salt.  Nonetheless, this behavior is breaking assumptions made
> in places like array_in and record_in.
> 
> For the moment I'm tempted to mark chkpass_in as stable (with a comment
> explaining that it isn't really) just so we can put in the error check
> in CREATE TYPE.  But I wonder if anyone has a better idea.

Can we have a separate function that accepts unencrypted passwords, and
change chkpass_in to only accept encrypted ones?  Similar to
to_tsquery() et al.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera                http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services


-- 
Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]