Re: weird libpq GSSAPI comment - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Stephen Frost
Subject Re: weird libpq GSSAPI comment
Date
Msg-id 20200106215349.GL3195@tamriel.snowman.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: weird libpq GSSAPI comment  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: weird libpq GSSAPI comment
List pgsql-hackers
Greetings,

* Alvaro Herrera (alvherre@2ndquadrant.com) wrote:
> On 2020-Jan-06, Stephen Frost wrote:
>
> > > I wonder if part of the confusion might be due to the synonyms we're
> > > using here for "in use".  Things seem to be "got running", "set up",
> > > "operating", "negotiated", ... - maybe that's part of the barrier to
> > > understanding?
> >
> > How about something like this?
> >
> >  * If GSSAPI Encryption is enabled, then call pg_GSS_have_cred_cache()
> >  * which will return true if we can acquire credentials (and give us a
> >  * handle to use in conn->gcred), and then send a packet to the server
> >  * asking for GSSAPI Encryption (and skip past SSL negotiation and
> >  * regular startup below).
>
> WFM.  (I'm not sure why you uppercase Encryption, though.)

Ok, great, attached is an actual patch which I'll push soon if there
aren't any other comments.

Thanks!

Stephen

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fix a performance issue with multiple logical-decoding walsenders
Next
From: Tomas Vondra
Date:
Subject: Re: psql FETCH_COUNT feature does not work with combined queries