On Jan 28, 2008 2:26 PM, Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com> wrote:
> sure, but do you know, Tom dislikes new columns in pg_proc :).
Tom doesn't seem to like the idea of obfuscation of function code much
either :-)
> This
> patch is usable sample of one possible solution and doesn't need
> initdb. And there is dependency on pgcrypto :(. But it is simply and
> it does all what is expected. Some customers wonted it. But I am not
> sure if similar patch can be accepted - this is prototype. And when
> I'll have some signals so patch can be commited I'll send final
> version with obfuscate col in pg_proc. Any patch of pg_proc needs two
> hours of work, and any change needs actualization - so lot of maybe
> useless work.
Yeah, I realise tweaking pg_proc is a large job, and wouldn't expect
you to necessarily do it immediately - I just wanted to throw my
requirements from a tools perspective into the inevitable discussion.
Cheers, Dave.
