Re: sha1, sha2 functions into core?
От | Andrew Dunstan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: sha1, sha2 functions into core? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4E43EFF9.4090406@dunslane.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: sha1, sha2 functions into core? (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 08/11/2011 10:46 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > Marko Kreen<markokr@gmail.com> writes: >> On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 9:19 PM, Tom Lane<tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >>> ... which this approach would create, because digest() isn't restricted >>> to just those algorithms. I think it'd be better to just invent two >>> new functions, which also avoids issues for applications that currently >>> expect the digest functions to be installed in pgcrypto's schema. >> I would suggest digest() with fixed list of algorithms: md5, sha1, sha2. >> The uncommon/obsolete algorithms that can be used >> from digest() if compiled with openssl, are not something we >> need to worry over. In fact we have never "supported" them, >> as no testing has been done. > Hmm ... they may be untested by us, but I feel sure that if we remove > that functionality from pgcrypto, *somebody* is gonna complain. Yeah. Maybe we should add a test or two. > I don't see anything much wrong with sha1(bytea/text) -> bytea. > There's no law that says it has to work exactly like md5() does. > > I agree. We could provide an md5_b(text/bytea) -> bytea if people are really concerned about orthogonality. cheers andrew
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: