On Sun, 2011-11-20 at 18:31 +0900, Tatsuo Ishii wrote: > > On Sun, 2011-11-20 at 08:13 +0900, Tatsuo Ishii wrote: > >> > Thank you very much for the answer. > >> > Is there a plan for using sr_check_password in the next release of > >> > pgpool 3.1 series? > >> > >> Yes, it's in my plan. Unless supporting sr_check_password is too > >> invasive... > > > > Sorry, but I disagree. Either it is a bug and it should get fixed, or it > > isn't a bug, and this new feature should go into 3.2. Changing behaviour > > between minor releases should not happen. > > If sr_check_password is not in 3.1, you are argument is perfectly > adequate. But in 3.1 sr_check_password is there but it's not > used. Doesn't it a bug?
Could be a forgotten feature. In that case, I advocate to make it work in 3.1. -- Guillaume http://blog.guillaume.lelarge.info http://www.dalibo.com _______________________________________________ Pgpool-general mailing list [email protected] http://pgfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/pgpool-general
