On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 8:57 PM, Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@commandprompt.com> wrote: > 1. why are you using the expansible char array stuff instead of using > the StringInfo facility? > > 2. is md5 the most appropriate digest for this? If you need a > cryptographically secure hash, do we need something stronger? If not, > why not just use hash_any?
We don't need a cryptographically secure hash. There is no special reason for why it is like it is, I just didn't think of the better alternatives that you are proposing. Should I send an updated patch? Anything else? Thanks for the review, Joachim -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
