On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 8:57 PM, Alvaro Herrera
<alvherre@commandprompt.com> wrote:
> 1. why are you using the expansible char array stuff instead of using
> the StringInfo facility?
>
> 2. is md5 the most appropriate digest for this? If you need a
> cryptographically secure hash, do we need something stronger? If not,
> why not just use hash_any?
We don't need a cryptographically secure hash.
There is no special reason for why it is like it is, I just didn't
think of the better alternatives that you are proposing.
Should I send an updated patch? Anything else?
Thanks for the review,
Joachim