On 2015-06-26 15:36:53 -0400, David G. Johnston wrote: > On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 3:09 PM, Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote: > > > On 2015-06-24 16:41:48 +0200, Andres Freund wrote: > > > I, by now, have come to a different conclusion. I think it's time to > > > entirely drop the renegotiation support. > > > > I think by now we essentially concluded that we should do that. What I'm > > not sure yet is how: Do we want to rip it out in master and just change > > the default in the backbranches, or do we want to rip it out in all > > branches and leave a faux guc in place in the back branches. I vote for > > the latter, but would be ok with both variants. > > > > > 3. Change the "default" and make the guc impotent - in the back > branches. Its minimally invasive and accomplishes the same user-facing > goal as "ripping it out".
What would be the point of that? The code is pretty localized, so leaving it in, but unreachable, seems to have no benefits. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers