The following bug has been logged on the website:
Bug reference: 6371
Logged by: Vitaly
Email address: vital...@gmail.com
PostgreSQL version: 9.1.2
Operating system: Windows 7 x86
Description:
Installation stops after "Initialising the database..." without any alerts
The following bug has been logged on the website:
Bug reference: 6370
Logged by: Ryan Culpepper
Email address: r...@cs.utah.edu
PostgreSQL version: Unsupported/Unknown
Operating system: not applicable
Description:
This is a documentation bug (or feature request), not
The following bug has been logged on the website:
Bug reference: 6372
Logged by: Anjali Arora
Email address: anjali_...@yahoo.co.in
PostgreSQL version: 9.0.4
Operating system: Cent OS
Description:
The 8.2.2 postgres version works well with default fsync value on CIFS
On Mon, Jan 2, 2012 at 17:27, wrote:
> The following bug has been logged on the website:
>
> Bug reference: 6372
> Logged by: Anjali Arora
> Email address: anjali_...@yahoo.co.in
> PostgreSQL version: 9.0.4
> Operating system: Cent OS
> Description:
>
> The 8.2.2 postgres ver
On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 11:42:38AM -0400, Noah Misch wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 09:32:30AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 6:15 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> > > Noah Misch writes:
> > >> Let's look at the behavior of DDL-exposed access constraints for
> > >> precedent. ?We
>
Magnus Hagander writes:
> On Mon, Jan 2, 2012 at 17:27, wrote:
>> PST ERROR: could not fsync file "base/16409": Invalid argument Dec 30
>> 03:00:26 devok64-8 postgres_cifs_kaz_1[15812]: [2-2] [local] 15812
>> 2011-12-30 03:00:26.511 PST STATEMENT: CREATE DATABASE "KazDB
The specific error see
On Mon, Jan 2, 2012 at 21:14, Tom Lane wrote:
> Magnus Hagander writes:
>> On Mon, Jan 2, 2012 at 17:27, wrote:
>>> PST ERROR: could not fsync file "base/16409": Invalid argument Dec 30
>>> 03:00:26 devok64-8 postgres_cifs_kaz_1[15812]: [2-2] [local] 15812
>>> 2011-12-30 03:00:26.511 PST STATE
Magnus Hagander writes:
> On Mon, Jan 2, 2012 at 21:14, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I'm wondering what's your basis for asserting we don't support CIFS in
>> general? It's probably not terribly bulletproof, but any worse than NFS?
> Yes, it is a lot worse than NFS from experience. I can't find a
> refer
On Mon, Jan 2, 2012 at 21:28, Tom Lane wrote:
> Magnus Hagander writes:
>> On Mon, Jan 2, 2012 at 21:14, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> I'm wondering what's your basis for asserting we don't support CIFS in
>>> general? It's probably not terribly bulletproof, but any worse than NFS?
>
>> Yes, it is a lot
Magnus Hagander writes:
> On Mon, Jan 2, 2012 at 21:28, Tom Lane wrote:
>> it seems like EINVAL is a considerably more reasonable thing to return
>> than EBADF, if the filesystem is trying to tell you that it won't fsync
>> a directory. So I'm a bit surprised this question hasn't come up for
>>
Excerpts from Tom Lane's message of lun ene 02 17:28:33 -0300 2012:
> Anyway the immediate question is which errnos are reasonable for copydir
> to ignore. Just looking at the standard's description of fsync's error
> conditions:
>
> The fsync() function shall fail if:
> [EBADF]
> T
Alvaro Herrera writes:
> Excerpts from Tom Lane's message of lun ene 02 17:28:33 -0300 2012:
>> it seems like EINVAL is a considerably more reasonable thing to return
>> than EBADF, if the filesystem is trying to tell you that it won't fsync
>> a directory. So I'm a bit surprised this question ha
12 matches
Mail list logo
