Re: Re: [BUGS] libpq does not manage SSL callbacks properly when other libraries are involved.

Tom Lane wrote: <blockquote cite="mid:20380.1227025250@sss.pgh.pa.us" type="cite"><pre wrap="">Alvaro Herrera <a
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"href="mailto:alvherre@commandprompt.com"><alvherre@commandprompt.com></a> writes:
</pre><blockquotetype="cite"><pre wrap="">Bruce Momjian wrote:   </pre><blockquote type="cite"><pre wrap="">This is not
somethingwe would typically backpatch because of the danger
 
of introducing some unexpected change in libpq.  We can provide a patch
to anyone who needs it, or if the community wants it backpatched I can
certainly do that.     </pre></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote><br /> If we start deciding we are not backpatching
fixesthat we know cause crashes, where is the limit?<br /><br /><blockquote cite="mid:20380.1227025250@sss.pgh.pa.us"
type="cite"><blockquotetype="cite"><pre wrap="">It isn't?  It does seem like a bug, which we do typically backpatch ...
 </pre></blockquote><pre wrap="">
 
Well, it's a risk-reward tradeoff.  In this case it seems like there's
a nontrivial risk of creating new bugs against fixing a problem that
evidently affects very few people.  I concur with Bruce's feeling that
we shouldn't backpatch ... at least not now.  Once the patch has been
through beta testing we could reconsider.
        regards, tom lane </pre></blockquote> I would like to see this backpatched.  Even though the PostgreSQL
communityhasn't seen a lot of complaints, there have been a number of reports where the bug has caused crashes.  Ubuntu
launchpadhas 6 duplicates for this bug.  php has a bug report for it.  So it's not like people don't know about it. 
Theyjust didn't know how to fix it.  All that said, I agree it's safer to wait until the 8.4 beta cycle has given this
codechange a good run before proceeding.  In the mean time distributions can either backpatch it themselves or wait for
PostgreSQLcommunity to apply the patch.<br /><br /> For the environment where I have this problem, I think it's still
goingto be a up hill battle to get RedHat to incorporate the fix into RHEL5.  That's whichever route the community
takeswith backpatching.<br /><br /> Russell.<br /><br />