Hi,
Is anyone here interested in helping to evaluate an experimental patch
for wolfSSL support?
Attached please find a WIP patch for wolfSSL support in postgresql-12.
As a shortcut, you may find this merge request helpful:
https://salsa.debian.org/postgresql/postgresql/-/merge_requests/4
I
On 2020-06-20 09:08, Fabien COELHO wrote:
I cannot say I'm a fan of this kind of keywords added for some arguments.
I guess that it allows distinguishing between variants. I do not have the
standard at hand: I wanted to check whether these keywords could be
reordered, i.e. whether SUBSTRING(text
On 2020-06-26 14:21, Amit Kapila wrote:
On Sat, Mar 28, 2020 at 7:37 PM Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Enable Unix-domain sockets support on Windows
+
+/*
+ * Windows headers don't define this structure, but you can define it yourself
+ * to use the functionality.
+ */
+struct sockaddr_un
+{
+ u
On Thu, Jun 25, 2020 at 12:59 AM Robert Haas wrote:
>
> So, I don't think we can wire in a constant like 10x. That's really
> unprincipled and I think it's a bad idea. What we could do, though, is
> replace the existing Boolean-valued GUC with a new GUC that controls
> the size at which the aggreg
On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 05:24:36PM -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 4:59 PM Tomas Vondra
wrote:
I agree larger work_mem for hashagg (and thus less spilling) may mean
lower work_mem for so some other nodes that are less sensitive to this.
But I think this needs to be formula
On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 3:06 PM Peter Eisentraut
wrote:
>
> On 2020-06-26 14:21, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 28, 2020 at 7:37 PM Peter Eisentraut
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Enable Unix-domain sockets support on Windows
> >>
> >
> > +
> > +/*
> > + * Windows headers don't define this structure,
On 2020-06-27 00:33, Felix Lechner wrote:
Is anyone here interested in helping to evaluate an experimental patch
for wolfSSL support?
What would be the advantage of using wolfSSL over OpenSSL?
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Re
Re: Peter Eisentraut
> What would be the advantage of using wolfSSL over OpenSSL?
Avoiding the OpenSSL-vs-GPL linkage problem with readline.
Christoph
On Thu, Jun 11, 2020 at 1:07 PM Pavel Stehule wrote:
>
> Thank you for comments, attached updated patch
>
Few comments:
+invalid_filter_format(char *message, char *filename, char *line, int lineno)
+{
+ char *displayname;
+
+ displayname = *filename == '-' ? "stdin" : filename;
On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 02:50:27PM +0200, Christoph Berg wrote:
> Re: Peter Eisentraut
> > What would be the advantage of using wolfSSL over OpenSSL?
>
> Avoiding the OpenSSL-vs-GPL linkage problem with readline.
Uh, wolfSSL is GPL2:
https://www.wolfssl.com/license/
Not sure why we woul
On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 9:23 AM Bharath Rupireddy
wrote:
>
> Thanks Rushabh and Vignesh for the comments.
>
> >
> > One comment:
> > We could change below code:
> > + */
> > + if (!cstate->binary)
> > + cstate->raw_buf = (char *) palloc(RAW_BUF_SIZE + 1);
> > + else
> > + cstate->raw_buf = NULL;
>
Bruce Momjian writes:
> On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 02:50:27PM +0200, Christoph Berg wrote:
>> Re: Peter Eisentraut
>>> What would be the advantage of using wolfSSL over OpenSSL?
>> Avoiding the OpenSSL-vs-GPL linkage problem with readline.
> Uh, wolfSSL is GPL2:
> https://www.wolfssl.com/lice
On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 10:56:46AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian writes:
> > On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 02:50:27PM +0200, Christoph Berg wrote:
> >> Re: Peter Eisentraut
> >>> What would be the advantage of using wolfSSL over OpenSSL?
>
> >> Avoiding the OpenSSL-vs-GPL linkage problem with
Bruce Momjian writes:
> Also, wolfSSL is developed by a company and dual GPL/commerical
> licenses, so it seems like a mismatch to me.
Yeah, that's definitely a factor behind my disinterest in
making wolfSSL be the only alternative. However, as long as
it's available on GPL terms, I don't see a
On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 11:16:26AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian writes:
> > Also, wolfSSL is developed by a company and dual GPL/commerical
> > licenses, so it seems like a mismatch to me.
>
> Yeah, that's definitely a factor behind my disinterest in
> making wolfSSL be the only alterna
I wrote:
> Daniel Gustafsson writes:
>> SSL_R_UNKNOWN_PROTOCOL seem to covers cases when someone manages to perform
>> something which OpenSSL believes is a broken SSLv2 connection, but their own
>> client-level code use it to refer to SSL as well as TLS. Maybe it's worth
>> adding as a belts and
Hello,
On "Debian GNU/Linux 9 (stretch)", compiling master just now, I get the
following (interspersed with some output fom my build script):
-- [2020.06.27 19:07:42 HEAD/1] ./configure
--prefix=/home/aardvark/pg_stuff/pg_installations/pgsql.HEAD
--bindir=/home/aardvark/pg_stuff/pg_installa
Erik Rijkers writes:
> On "Debian GNU/Linux 9 (stretch)", compiling master just now, I get the
> following (interspersed with some output fom my build script):
Yeah, just saw that in the buildfarm. Should be OK now.
regards, tom lane
On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 01:28:15PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Erik Rijkers writes:
> > On "Debian GNU/Linux 9 (stretch)", compiling master just now, I get the
> > following (interspersed with some output fom my build script):
>
> Yeah, just saw that in the buildfarm. Should be OK now.
I can conf
On 2020-06-27 19:28, Tom Lane wrote:
Erik Rijkers writes:
On "Debian GNU/Linux 9 (stretch)", compiling master just now, I get
the
following (interspersed with some output fom my build script):
Yeah, just saw that in the buildfarm. Should be OK now.
It is. I should've checked the farm be
On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 10:15 PM Masahiko Sawada
wrote:
> Regarding to the extent of the impact, this bug will affect the user
> who turned vacuum_index_cleanup off or executed manually vacuum with
> INDEX_CLEANUP off for a long time, after some vacuums. On the other
> hand, the user who uses INDE
Re: Tom Lane
> In any case, the patch as written seems to *remove* the option
> to compile PG with OpenSSL.
It's a WIP patch, meant to see if it works at all. Of course OpenSSL
would stay as the default option.
Christoph
Christoph Berg writes:
> It's a WIP patch, meant to see if it works at all. Of course OpenSSL
> would stay as the default option.
Fair enough. One thing that struck me as I looked at it was that
most of the #include hackery seemed unnecessary. The configure
script could add -I/usr/include/wolfs
Since pg11 pg_read_file() and friends can be used with absolute paths as long as
the user is superuser or explicitly granted the role pg_read_server_files.
I noticed that when trying to read a virtual file, e.g.:
SELECT pg_read_file('/proc/self/status');
the returned result is a zero length st
Em sáb., 27 de jun. de 2020 às 09:50, Christoph Berg
escreveu:
> Re: Peter Eisentraut
> > What would be the advantage of using wolfSSL over OpenSSL?
>
> Avoiding the OpenSSL-vs-GPL linkage problem with readline.
>
I'm curious, how do you intend to solve a linking problem with
OpenSSL-vs-GPL-readl
On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 3:25 PM Ranier Vilela wrote:
> Em sáb., 27 de jun. de 2020 às 09:50, Christoph Berg
> escreveu:
>
>> Re: Peter Eisentraut
>> > What would be the advantage of using wolfSSL over OpenSSL?
>>
>> Avoiding the OpenSSL-vs-GPL linkage problem with readline.
>>
> I'm curious, how
Re: Jonah H. Harris
> Somewhere, I recall seeing an open-source OpenSSL compatibility wrapper for
> WolfSSL. Assuming that still exists, this patch seems entirely unnecessary.
Unless you actually tried.
Christoph
Re: Ranier Vilela
> I'm curious, how do you intend to solve a linking problem with
> OpenSSL-vs-GPL-readline, with another GPL product?
> WolfSSL, will provide a commercial license for PostgreSQL?
It's replacing OpenSSL+GPL with GPL+GPL.
> Isn't LIbreSSL a better alternative?
I don't know.
Chri
On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 04:22:51PM -0300, Ranier Vilela wrote:
> Em sáb., 27 de jun. de 2020 às 09:50, Christoph Berg
> escreveu:
>
> Re: Peter Eisentraut
> > What would be the advantage of using wolfSSL over OpenSSL?
>
> Avoiding the OpenSSL-vs-GPL linkage problem with readline.
>
Joe Conway writes:
> The attached patch fixes this for me. I think it ought to be backpatched
> through
> pg11.
> Comments?
1. Doesn't seem to be accounting for the possibility of an error in fread().
2. Don't we want to remove the stat() call altogether, if we're not
going to believe its leng
On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 05:56:10PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> I just noticed that when you compile pg_bsd_indent with a PG tree that
> has --enable-jit (or something around that), then it compiles the source
> files into bytecode.
>
> Obviously this is not harmful since these files don't get i
Bruce Momjian writes:
> On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 05:56:10PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> I just noticed that when you compile pg_bsd_indent with a PG tree that
>> has --enable-jit (or something around that), then it compiles the source
>> files into bytecode.
>> Obviously this is not harmful sin
On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 05:12:57PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian writes:
> > On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 05:56:10PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> >> I just noticed that when you compile pg_bsd_indent with a PG tree that
> >> has --enable-jit (or something around that), then it compiles the s
Em sáb., 27 de jun. de 2020 às 16:40, Bruce Momjian
escreveu:
> On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 04:22:51PM -0300, Ranier Vilela wrote:
> > Em sáb., 27 de jun. de 2020 às 09:50, Christoph Berg
> > escreveu:
> >
> > Re: Peter Eisentraut
> > > What would be the advantage of using wolfSSL over OpenS
On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 06:14:21PM -0300, Ranier Vilela wrote:
> Em sáb., 27 de jun. de 2020 às 16:40, Bruce Momjian
> escreveu:
>
> On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 04:22:51PM -0300, Ranier Vilela wrote:
> > Em sáb., 27 de jun. de 2020 às 09:50, Christoph Berg
> > escreveu:
> >
> >
On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 3:37 PM Christoph Berg wrote:
> Re: Jonah H. Harris
> > Somewhere, I recall seeing an open-source OpenSSL compatibility wrapper
> for
> > WolfSSL. Assuming that still exists, this patch seems entirely
> unnecessary.
>
> Unless you actually tried.
Did you? It worked for m
Em sáb., 27 de jun. de 2020 às 18:23, Bruce Momjian
escreveu:
> On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 06:14:21PM -0300, Ranier Vilela wrote:
> > Em sáb., 27 de jun. de 2020 às 16:40, Bruce Momjian
> > escreveu:
> >
> > On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 04:22:51PM -0300, Ranier Vilela wrote:
> > > Em sáb., 27 de
On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 06:25:21PM -0300, Ranier Vilela wrote:
> Personally, the dynamic link does not hurt the GPL.
> But some people, do not think so, it was also unclear what Mr Stallman thinks
> of the subject (dynamic link).
I think Stallman says the courts have to decide, which kind of makes
Christoph Berg writes:
> Re: Ranier Vilela
>> Isn't LIbreSSL a better alternative?
> I don't know.
It should work all right --- it's the default ssl library on OpenBSD
and some other platforms, so we have some buildfarm coverage for it.
(AFAICT, none of the OpenBSD machines are running the ssl t
Bruce Momjian writes:
> On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 06:25:21PM -0300, Ranier Vilela wrote:
>> Personally, the dynamic link does not hurt the GPL.
>> But some people, do not think so, it was also unclear what Mr Stallman thinks
>> of the subject (dynamic link).
> I think Stallman says the courts have
On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 05:46:17PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian writes:
> > On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 06:25:21PM -0300, Ranier Vilela wrote:
> >> Personally, the dynamic link does not hurt the GPL.
> >> But some people, do not think so, it was also unclear what Mr Stallman
> >> thinks
> >
Hi,
On 2020-06-27 17:12:57 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian writes:
> > On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 05:56:10PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> >> I just noticed that when you compile pg_bsd_indent with a PG tree that
> >> has --enable-jit (or something around that), then it compiles the source
>
Andres Freund writes:
> I can test that with another program, but for some reason pg_bsd_indent
> fails to build against 13/HEAD, but builds fine against 12. Not sure yet
> what's up:
Huh. Works here on RHEL8 ... what platform are you using?
regards, tom lane
Andres Freund writes:
> On 2020-06-27 17:12:57 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I wouldn't care about this particularly for pg_bsd_indent itself,
>> but it suggests that we're probably building .bc files for client-side
>> files, which seems like a substantial waste of time. Maybe we need
>> different C
On Saturday, June 27, 2020, Tom Lane wrote:
> Christoph Berg writes:
> > Re: Ranier Vilela
> >> Isn't LIbreSSL a better alternative?
>
> > I don't know.
>
> It should work all right --- it's the default ssl library on OpenBSD
> and some other platforms, so we have some buildfarm coverage for it.
Hallo Peter,
v2 patches apply cleanly, compile, global check ok, citext check ok, doc
gen ok. No further comments.
As I did not find an entry in the CF, so I did nothing about tagging it
"ready".
--
Fabien.
On Sun, Jun 21, 2020 at 01:35:13AM -0700, Noah Misch wrote:
> In brief, I'm proposing to raise xidWrapLimit-xidStopLimit to 3M and
> xidWrapLimit-xidWarnLimit to 40M. Likewise for mxact counterparts.
Here's the patch for it.
> 1. VACUUM, to advance a limit, may assign IDs subject to one of the l
47 matches
Mail list logo
