On Wed, Aug 31, 2022 at 4:08 PM Zhihong Yu wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 31, 2022 at 3:19 PM Alvaro Herrera
> wrote:
>
>> So I was wrong in thinking that "this case was simple to implement" as I
>> replied upthread. Doing that actually required me to rewrite lar
On Fri, Sep 2, 2022 at 8:37 AM Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
> This had bitrotted a fair bit, attached is a rebase along with (mostly)
> documentation fixes. 0001 adds a generic GUC for ignoring event triggers
> and
> 0002 adds the login event with event trigger support, and hooks it up to
> the
> GU
Hi,
In CheckLDAPAuth(), around line 2606:
if (r != LDAP_SUCCESS)
{
ereport(LOG,
(errmsg("could not search LDAP for filter \"%s\" on
server \"%s\": %s",
It seems that the call to ldap_msgfree() is missing in the above case.
According to
https://www.o
On Sun, Sep 4, 2022 at 12:25 AM Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 04, 2022 at 01:52:10AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > I can't get too excited about this. All of the error exit paths in
> > backend authentication code will lead immediately to process exit, so
> > the possibility of some memory b
On Sun, Sep 4, 2022 at 3:58 AM Zhihong Yu wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, Sep 4, 2022 at 12:25 AM Michael Paquier
> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Sep 04, 2022 at 01:52:10AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> > I can't get too excited about this. All of the error exit paths in
>>
On Sun, Sep 4, 2022 at 10:37 PM Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 04, 2022 at 06:52:37AM -0700, Zhihong Yu wrote:
> > Please take a look at patch v3.
>
> Fine as far as it goes. I would have put the initialization of
> search_message closer to ldap_search_s() for cons
On Mon, Sep 5, 2022 at 9:51 AM Nikita Malakhov wrote:
> Hi hackers!
>
> This is the original patch rebased onto v15 master with conflicts
> resolved. I'm currently
> studying it and latest comments in the original thread, and would try go
> the way that
> was mentioned in the thread (last message
Hi,
w.r.t. the while loop in findNotNullConstraintAttnum():
+ if (multiple == NULL)
+ break;
I think `pfree(arr)` should be called before breaking.
+ if (constraint->cooked_expr != NULL)
+ return
tryExtractNotNullFromNode(stringToNode(constraint->cooked_expr), rel
Hi,
I was looking at this check in src/backend/parser/parse_utilcmd.c w.r.t.
constraint:
if (indclass->values[i] != defopclass ||
attform->attcollation != index_rel->rd_indcollation[i]
||
attoptions != (Datum) 0 ||
index_r
501 - 509 of 509 matches
Mail list logo
