On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 11:42:16PM +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> Somewhat on topic though, 1.1.1 adds a RAND_priv_bytes function for random
> numbers that are supposed to be private and extra protected via it's own DRBG.
> Maybe we should use that for SCRAM salts etc in case we detect 1.1.1?
M
On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 12:42:13AM -0800, Noah Misch wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 04:34:33PM +0100, Dmitry Dolgov wrote:
> > Just to clarify, since the CF item for this patch was withdrawn
> > recently. Does it mean that eventually the thread [1] covers this one
> > too?
> >
> > [1]:
> > http
On Sun, Aug 02, 2020 at 05:29:57PM +1200, Thomas Munro wrote:
> There are one or two failures per month on crake. It looks like when
> authentication is rejected, as expected in the tests, the psql process
> is exiting, but there is a race where the Perl script still wants to
> write a dummy query
Hi,
There are one or two failures per month on crake. It looks like when
authentication is rejected, as expected in the tests, the psql process
is exiting, but there is a race where the Perl script still wants to
write a dummy query to its stdin (?), so you get:
psql: FATAL: LDAP authentication
On Sun, Aug 02, 2020 at 01:02:42PM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
> Thank you for updating the patch!
>
> Here are my comments on v3 patch:
>
> @@ -2024,6 +2033,11 @@ lazy_check_needs_freeze(Buffer buf, bool *hastup)
> if (PageIsNew(page) || PageIsEmpty(page))
> return false;
>
> +
On Sat, 1 Aug 2020 at 16:02, Mahendra Singh Thalor wrote:
>
> Thanks Justin.
>
> On Sat, 1 Aug 2020 at 11:47, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 04:55:14PM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> > > Bcc:
> > > Subject: Re: display offset along with block number in vacuum errors
> > > Rep
On Sat, 1 Aug 2020 at 02:02, James Coleman wrote:
> I'd previously attached a patch [1], and there seemed to be agreement
> it was reasonable (lightly so, but I also didn't see any
> disagreement); would someone be able to either commit the change or
> provide some additional feedback?
It looks f
On Sun, 2 Aug 2020 at 11:16, David Rowley wrote:
> Maybe it would be better just to get rid of the enum and just #define
> the values. It seems unlikely that we're every going to need many more
> states than what are there already, let along more than, say 127 of
> them. It does look like manifest
On 07/01/13 20:10, Josh Kupershmidt wrote:
> I am eager to see the relative paths issue fixed, but maybe we need to
> bite the bullet and sort out the escaping of command-line options in
> the rest of pg_ctl first, so that a DataDir like "/tmp/here's a \"
> quote" can consistently be used by pg_ctl
On Sat, 1 Aug 2020 at 12:17, Thomas Munro wrote:
>
> On Sat, Aug 1, 2020 at 7:22 AM James Coleman wrote:
> > [v2 patch set]
>
> I ran it through pgindent which insisted on adding some newlines, I
> manually replaced some spaces with tabs to match nearby lines, I added
> some asterisks in your exa
On Sun, Aug 02, 2020 at 12:00:56AM +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> > On 10 Jul 2020, at 15:30, Peter Eisentraut
> > wrote:
> >
> > On 2020-05-23 11:14, Vik Fearing wrote:
> >> Here is a patch to provide default gucs for EXPLAIN options.
> >> I have two goals with this patch. The first is that
> On 10 Jul 2020, at 15:30, Peter Eisentraut
> wrote:
>
> On 2020-05-23 11:14, Vik Fearing wrote:
>> Here is a patch to provide default gucs for EXPLAIN options.
>> I have two goals with this patch. The first is that I personally
>> *always* want BUFFERS turned on, so this would allow me to do
> On 6 Jul 2020, at 12:35, yuzuko wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 6:26 PM Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>>
>>> On 21 Apr 2020, at 18:21, yuzuko wrote:
>>
>>> I'll update the patch soon.
>>
>> Do you have an updated version to submit? The previous patch no longer
>> applies
>> to HEAD, so I'm
Daniel Gustafsson writes:
> On 1 Aug 2020, at 09:06, Fabien COELHO wrote:
>> AFAICR the feedback is that the Expect perl module is not welcome, which
>> seems to suggest that it would have to be re-implemented somehow. This is
>> not my dev philosophy, I won't do that, so I'm sorry to say that
> On 1 Aug 2020, at 20:30, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> This revised version is essentially the same as your original patch --
> I have only made superficial adjuments. I think that I will be able to
> commit this next week, barring objections.
As we're out of time for the July CF where this is regi
Anastasia Lubennikova writes:
> On 31.03.2020 23:45, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Still haven't got a better naming idea, but in the meantime here's
>> a rebase to fix a conflict with 612a1ab76.
> Maybe "amadjustmembers" will work?
Not having any better idea, I adopted that one.
> I've looked through the
> On 1 Aug 2020, at 09:06, Fabien COELHO wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
This patch no longer applies: http://cfbot.cputube.org/patch_27_2262.log
CF entry has been updated to Waiting on Author.
>>>
>>> This patch hasn't been updated and still doesn't apply, do you intend to
>>> rebase
>>>
On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 7:08 AM Michail Nikolaev
wrote:
> While working on support for index hint bits on standby [1] I have
> started to getting
> "ERROR: could not find left sibling of block in index "
> during stress tests.
I reproduced the bug using your steps (including the pg_usle
On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 8:17 PM Thomas Munro wrote:
>
> On Sat, Aug 1, 2020 at 7:22 AM James Coleman wrote:
> > [v2 patch set]
>
> I ran it through pgindent which insisted on adding some newlines, I
> manually replaced some spaces with tabs to match nearby lines, I added
> some asterisks in your
> On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 03:35:22PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> I started to look through this again, and really found myself wondering
> why we're going to all this work to invent what are fundamentally pretty
> bogus "features". The thing that particularly sticks in my craw is the
> 0005 patch,
On Sat, Aug 01, 2020 at 12:31:53PM +0530, Mahendra Singh Thalor wrote:
> Actually I was waiting for review comments from committer and other
> people also and was planning to send a patch after that. I already
> fixed your comments in my offline patch and was waiting for more
> comments. Anyway, th
On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 4:47 AM Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> So, you said lseek() is faster than fstat, and we would only use the
> latter because we want to avoid the file position jumping ahead, even
> though it's slower. But if the next read/write is not going to care
> about the file position beca
Hello,
This patch no longer applies: http://cfbot.cputube.org/patch_27_2262.log
CF entry has been updated to Waiting on Author.
This patch hasn't been updated and still doesn't apply, do you intend to rebase
it during this commitfest or should we move it to returned with feedback? It
can a
Thanks Justin.
On Sat, 1 Aug 2020 at 11:47, Justin Pryzby wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 04:55:14PM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> > Bcc:
> > Subject: Re: display offset along with block number in vacuum errors
> > Reply-To:
> > In-Reply-To:
> >
>
> whoops
>
> > On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 12:35
24 matches
Mail list logo
