On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 07:58:43PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Personally I'm satisfied to leave it as-is, since this issue apparently
> occurs only in a minority of OpenSSL versions, and not the newest.
Leaving things in their current state is fine by me. Would it be
better to add a note about the business with 3.0 though? My gut is
telling me that we'd better revisit those code paths in a couple of
years when support for legacy OpenSSL is removed, and most likely we
would have forgotten about all those details.
--
Michael
