Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH v9] GSSAPI encryption support

2016-03-31 Thread Michael Paquier
On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 6:10 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > If that's what it is, it seems fairly broken to have it connected up to a > GUC variable. Especially one that's USERSET; some people will wonder why > frobbing it with SET does nothing, and others will bitch that they think >

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH v9] GSSAPI encryption support

2016-03-31 Thread Tom Lane
Robbie Harwood writes: >>> + { >>> + {"gss_encrypt", PGC_USERSET, CONN_AUTH_SECURITY, >>> +gettext_noop("Require encryption for all GSSAPI connections."), >>> +NULL, >>> +GUC_NOT_IN_SAMPLE | GUC_DISALLOW_IN_FILE >>> + }, >>> +

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH v9] GSSAPI encryption support

2016-03-31 Thread Robbie Harwood
Alvaro Herrera writes: > Robbie Harwood wrote: >> Michael Paquier writes: > >> > + iov[0].iov_base = lenbuf; >> > + iov[0].iov_len = 4; >> > + iov[1].iov_base = output.value; >> > + iov[1].iov_len = output.length; >> > + >> > + ret

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH v9] GSSAPI encryption support

2016-03-31 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Robbie Harwood wrote: > Michael Paquier writes: > > + iov[0].iov_base = lenbuf; > > + iov[0].iov_len = 4; > > + iov[1].iov_base = output.value; > > + iov[1].iov_len = output.length; > > + > > + ret = writev(port->sock, iov, 2); > > > > writev and iovec are

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH v9] GSSAPI encryption support

2016-03-31 Thread Robbie Harwood
Michael Paquier writes: > On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 2:14 PM, Michael Paquier > wrote: >> On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 1:01 PM, Robbie Harwood wrote: >>> A new version of my GSSAPI encryption patchset is available, both in >>>