Dan Kaminsky wrote:
> >> 1) No roots (but still works for some unknown reason)
> >> 2) Explicitly configured corporate roots
> >> 3) Explicitly configured corporate roots, AND global roots
> >> 4) Global roots (but still works for some unknown reason)
> So, if you do nothing special, it's #1? Sou
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Dan Kaminsky wrote:
1) No roots (but still works for some unknown reason)
2) Explicitly configured corporate roots
3) Explicitly configured corporate roots, AND global roots
4) Global roots (but still works for some unknown reason)
>
>> So, if you do n
Magnus Hagander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'd set the default to "verifypeer" in 8.4 and up, but backpatch it with
> a default of "off". That way we don't break existing setups, but give
> users the ability to verify if if they want to.
This seems a bit large/invasive/new-feature-ish for a bac
Tom Lane wrote:
> Magnus Hagander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I'd set the default to "verifypeer" in 8.4 and up, but backpatch it with
>> a default of "off". That way we don't break existing setups, but give
>> users the ability to verify if if they want to.
>
> This seems a bit large/invasive/
Magnus Hagander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The code is there, actually, it's just #ifdef NOT_USED :-) From a *long*
> time ago, and the commit message just says "silence compiler warnings",
> so I've not managed to figure out why...
I think the commit you're looking for is this one:
2002-09-26
Tom Lane wrote:
> Magnus Hagander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> The code is there, actually, it's just #ifdef NOT_USED :-) From a *long*
>> time ago, and the commit message just says "silence compiler warnings",
>> so I've not managed to figure out why...
>
> I think the commit you're looking for
Magnus Hagander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> I think the commit you're looking for is this one:
>> 2002-09-26 00:41 momjian
> No, that's not the one. It's the one after that one, at:
No, that one is just fallout from having removed the *use* of the
function in the earlier pat
Tom Lane wrote:
> Magnus Hagander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Tom Lane wrote:
>>> I think the commit you're looking for is this one:
>>> 2002-09-26 00:41 momjian
>
>> No, that's not the one. It's the one after that one, at:
>
> No, that one is just fallout from having removed the *use* of the
Magnus Hagander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> In general, that code needs a look-over, I think. There may be more
> changes required.
Yeah, even assuming that it did what is wanted in the first place,
it's been #ifdef NOT_USED for an awfully long time. I'd suggest
looking for thread-safety and Wi
Magnus Hagander wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Magnus Hagander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> The code is there, actually, it's just #ifdef NOT_USED :-) From a *long*
> >> time ago, and the commit message just says "silence compiler warnings",
> >> so I've not managed to figure out why...
> >
> >
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I found the reason for the patch; the SSL guy at that time, "Bear",
> disappeared, and our code required SSL certificates at that point, so I
> removed the requrement:
Hmm, according to that thread the code that got diked out "didn't work
according to P
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I found the reason for the patch; the SSL guy at that time, "Bear",
> > disappeared, and our code required SSL certificates at that point, so I
> > removed the requrement:
>
> Hmm, according to that thread the code that got diked out
Added to TODO:
Enable creation of RETURNING rules on inherited tables that have dropped
columns
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2008-06/msg00183.php
---
Tom Lane wrote:
> "Alex
The following bug has been logged online:
Bug reference: 4365
Logged by: Gregg
Email address: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PostgreSQL version: 8.3
Operating system: Sus 10
Description:Need 24x 7 monitoring software for Postgresql
Details:
I need 24 x7 monitoring software for D
14 matches
Mail list logo
