Re: PG20 Minimum Dependency Thread - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Jacob Champion
Subject Re: PG20 Minimum Dependency Thread
Date
Msg-id CAOYmi+=85_4ntFof=PKkDMm38TH-9xevCJ_i4R2EWfUGeqKoKw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread
In response to Re: PG20 Minimum Dependency Thread  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
Responses Re: PG20 Minimum Dependency Thread
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Jul 8, 2026 at 10:35 PM Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
> That would mean to drop OpenSSL 1.1.1, as there is nothing in-between
> up to 3.0.0.  That feels OK to drop for PG20, even if support for 3.0
> will end in a few months, as of September 2026:

I told Daniel a while back that I thought 3.0 was likely to be the
"new 1.0.2" (i.e. distros will keep it alive for *way* too long), but
I also didn't anticipate RHEL jumping to 3.5 in the middle of a
release line. So maybe Debian and Ubuntu will surprise me too?
Post-quantum stuff has an awful lot of momentum building, it seems.

--Jacob



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Geoghegan
Date:
Subject: Re: Hash index bucket split bug
Next
From: Daniel Gustafsson
Date:
Subject: Re: libpq: Process buffered SSL read bytes to support records >8kB on async API