On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 21:02, Heikki Linnakangas
<heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> On 10.08.2011 21:45, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>>
>> On ons, 2011-08-10 at 14:26 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 2:24 PM, Andrew Dunstan<andrew@dunslane.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> It's come up before:
>>>> <http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-09/msg01293.php>
>>>
>>> I was about to wonder out loud if we might be trying to hit a moving
>>> target....
>>
>> I think we are dealing with a lot more moving targets than adding a new
>> version of SHA every 12 to 15 years.
>
> Moving to a something more modern for internal use is one thing. But
> regarding the user-visible md5() function, how about we jump off this
> treadmill and remove it altogether? And provide a backwards-compatible
> function in pgcrypto.
-1.
There are certainly a number of perfectly valid use-cases for md5, and
it would probably break a *lot* of applications to remove it.
+1 for adding the SHA functions to core as choices, of course.
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
