On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 3:37 PM, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote:
> On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 15:29, Marko Kreen <markokr@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 2:57 PM, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote:
>>> On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 10:25, Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>>>> Some of my personal discussions of this topic have suggested that some other
>>>> popular extensions like pgcrypto and hstore get converted too. I think
>>>> those all fail test (3), and I'm not actually sure where pgcrypto adds any
>>>> special dependency/distribution issues were it to be moved to the main
>>>> database package. If this general idea catches on, a wider discussion of
>>>> what else should get "promoted" to this extensions area would be
>>>> appropriate. The ones I picked seemed the easiest to justify by this
>>>> criteria set.
>>>
>>> pgcrypto would cause trouble for any builds *without* SSL. I don't
>>> think any packagers do that, but people doing manual builds would
>>> certainly get different results.
>>
>> What kind of trouble? It should work fine without SSL.
>
> Oh, you're right - it does. But it does provide different
> functionalties? Or does it actually do exactly the same stuff, just in
> different ways?
Same stuff, assuming you use recommended algorithms
(Blowfish, AES, MD5, SHA1, SHA2)
OpenSSL brings in more speedy implementations (maybe),
and additional algorithms (ripemd160, 3des, cast5, twofish).
--
marko
