* Joshua D. Drake (j...@commandprompt.com) wrote:
Well I was more referring to the default is:
check if null, if true return ok
check if valuntil today, if true return error
else return ok
To me we don't need the null check. However, when I tested it,
without the null check you can't
Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net writes:
Regardless, setting vuntil to some magic value that really means it's
actually NULL, which is what you'd need to do in order to get rid of
that explicit check for null, doesn't strike me as a good idea. When a
value is null, we shouldn't be looking at
On 06/09/2013 09:28 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
Even aside from that, the proposed change seems like a bad idea because
it introduces an unnecessary call of GetCurrentTimestamp() in the common
case where there's no valuntil limit. On some platforms that call is
pretty slow.
And that would explain
Hello,
In my quest to understand how all the logging etc works with
authentication I came across the area of crypt.c that checks for
valid_until but it seems like it has an extraneous check.
If I am wrong I apologize for the noise but wouldn't mind an explanation.
index f01d904..8d809b2
JD,
* Joshua D. Drake (j...@commandprompt.com) wrote:
In my quest to understand how all the logging etc works with
authentication I came across the area of crypt.c that checks for
valid_until but it seems like it has an extraneous check.
If I am wrong I apologize for the noise but wouldn't
On 06/08/2013 08:47 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
JD,
* Joshua D. Drake (j...@commandprompt.com) wrote:
In my quest to understand how all the logging etc works with
authentication I came across the area of crypt.c that checks for
valid_until but it seems like it has an extraneous check.
If I am
