Re: [JDBC] [HACKERS] Channel binding support for SCRAM-SHA-256

On 12/28/17 02:19, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 27, 2017 at 09:27:40AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 26, 2017 at 03:28:09PM -0500, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>>> On 12/22/17 03:10, Michael Paquier wrote:
>>>> Second thoughts on 0002 as there is actually no need to move around
>>>> errorMessage if the PGconn* pointer is saved in the SCRAM status data
>>>> as both are linked. The attached simplifies the logic even more.
>>>>
>>>
>>> That all looks pretty reasonable.
>>
>> Thanks for the review. Don't you think that the the refactoring
>> simplifications should be done first though? This would result in
>> producing the patch set in reverse order. I'll be fine to produce them
>> if need be.
> 
> Well, here is a patch set doing the reverse operation: refactoring does
> first in 0001 and support for tls-server-end-point is in 0002. Hope this
> helps.

committed

I reorganized the be_tls_get_certificate_hash() and
pgtls_get_peer_certificate_hash() functions a bit to not have most of
the code in a big if statement.

-- 
Peter Eisentraut              http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services