On 10.08.2011 21:45, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On ons, 2011-08-10 at 14:26 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 2:24 PM, Andrew Dunstan<andrew@dunslane.net> wrote:
>>> It's come up before:
>>> <http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-09/msg01293.php>
>>
>> I was about to wonder out loud if we might be trying to hit a moving target....
>
> I think we are dealing with a lot more moving targets than adding a new
> version of SHA every 12 to 15 years.
Moving to a something more modern for internal use is one thing. But
regarding the user-visible md5() function, how about we jump off this
treadmill and remove it altogether? And provide a backwards-compatible
function in pgcrypto.
-- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com