Magnus Hagander <mag...@hagander.net> writes:
> On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 4:05 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> Why would they need to be BACKEND, as opposed to just PGC_SIGHUP?
> I just thought semantically - because they do not change in a running
> backend. Any running backend will continue with encryption set up
> based on the old certificate.
Hm. Yeah, I guess there is some use in holding onto the values that were
actually used to initialize the current session, or at least there would
be if we exposed the cert contents in any fashion.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
