On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 3:37 PM, Magnus Hagander <mag...@hagander.net> wrote: > On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 15:29, Marko Kreen <mark...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 2:57 PM, Magnus Hagander <mag...@hagander.net> wrote: >>> On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 10:25, Greg Smith <g...@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 -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
