I'm working on a decoder to take a raw main/base file and given table format
parameters to pull out relevant data.
My question is whether anyone has developed such a tool. Something that
takes the raw file and table format as input and creates an ascii dump
(similar to pgdump).
The purpose is to
bruce wrote:
> > I think your proposed wording is removed enough from what the
> > complainant was saying that it is not worth to stick it in. The point
> > here is, to what extent do we want to spoon-feed careless sysadmins?
>
> OK, I have removed the paratheses paragraph about fork() and added
Andrew Chernow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I think a range check is needed in timetz_recv & time_recv.
I think that the design philosophy for the binary I/O code is to be as
fast as safely possible, and accordingly range-checks are present only
where needed for the backend to defend itself. Is
Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
-- Start of PGP signed section.
> On Tue, Dec 18, 2007 at 09:32:51AM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> > > On Mon, Dec 17, 2007 at 01:48:31PM +, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > > > Log Message:
> > > > ---
> > > > Improve wording.
>
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 17, 2007 at 01:48:31PM +, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > > Log Message:
> > > ---
> > > Improve wording.
>
> > I'd suggest removing everything between the parentheses, or perhaps
> > something like: By tracking allocated
When inserting a timetz in binary mode, there are no range checks on the time
value (nor on the zone). In text mode, things are fine:
postgres=# insert into t values ('24:00:00.01-05'::timetz);
ERROR: date/time field value out of range: "24:00:00.01-05"
// 24:00:00.01-05
double d
Decibel! wrote:
> > I fear the real complexity would be (as always) in the planner
> > rather than the
> > executor. I haven't really looked into what it would take to
> > arrange this or
> > how to decide when to do it.
>
> TODO?
This email was added to the 8.4 queue:
http://momjian
On Fri, 2007-21-12 at 18:05 -0400, Andrew Sullivan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> > > 2. Protect the content of a field from _some_ users on a given
> system,
> >
> > I would argue that (2) is reasonably well served today by setting up
> > separate databases for separate users.
>
> I thought act
On Dec 20, 2007, at 2:36 AM, Gokulakannan Somasundaram wrote:
I checked it by creating a table with 10 columns on a 32 bit
machine. i inserted 100,000 rows with trailing nulls and i observed
savings of 400Kbytes.
That doesn't really tell us anything... how big was the table
originally? Al
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 16:47:46 -0500
Andrew Sullivan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 21, 2007 at 04:19:51PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> > > 2.Protect the content of a field from _some_ users on a
> > > given system,
> >
> > I would argue
On Fri, Dec 21, 2007 at 04:19:51PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> > 2. Protect the content of a field from _some_ users on a given system,
>
> I would argue that (2) is reasonably well served today by setting up
> separate databases for separate users.
I thought actually this was one of the use-cases
Andrew Sullivan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hmm; this may be exactly part of the problem, though. It seems there are
> two possible cases in play:
> 1.Protect the content in the database (in this case, function bodies)
> from _all_ users on a given server. This is a case where you want to
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> >> indent needs the typedef list. Maybe we can hack something based on
> >> typedefs in the source code, instead of object files.
>
> > The only think of is to grab typedefs from the object file and then also
On Fri, Dec 21, 2007 at 01:57:44PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Merlin Moncure" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > ISTM the main issue is how exactly the authenticated user interacts
> > with the actor to give it the information it needs to get the real
> > key. This is significant because we don't want
"Pedro Belmino" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I am changing the file pg_index, it is necessary to generate a new file
> postgres.bki? How to generate?
"make" will take care of it.
regards, tom lane
---(end of broadcast)---
T
"Merlin Moncure" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> ISTM the main issue is how exactly the authenticated user interacts
> with the actor to give it the information it needs to get the real
> key. This is significant because we don't want to be boxed into an
> actor implementation that doesn't allow tha
Hello,
I am changing the file pg_index, it is necessary to generate a new file
postgres.bki? How to generate? Using the command:
./genbki.sh
Thanks
--
Pedro Belmino.
# Ciência da Computação - UNIFOR
# [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Dec 21, 2007 11:48 AM, Andrew Sullivan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 21, 2007 at 12:40:05AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> > whether there is a useful policy for it to implement. Andrew Sullivan
> > argued upthread that we cannot get anywhere with both keys and encrypted
> > function bod
On Fri, Dec 21, 2007 at 12:40:05AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> whether there is a useful policy for it to implement. Andrew Sullivan
> argued upthread that we cannot get anywhere with both keys and encrypted
> function bodies stored in the same database (I hope that's an adequate
> summary of his po
Andrew Sullivan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, Dec 21, 2007 at 12:09:28AM -0500, Merlin Moncure wrote:
>> Maybe a key management solution isn't required.
> I like this idea much better, because the same basic mechanism can be used
> for more than one thing, and it doesn't build in a system
On Fri, Dec 21, 2007 at 12:09:28AM -0500, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> Maybe a key management solution isn't required. If, instead of
> strictly wrapping a language with an encryption layer, we provide
> hooks (actors) that have the ability to operate on the function body
> when it arrives and leaves p
"Pavel Stehule" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 21/12/2007, Merlin Moncure <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> ... The real issue as I see it is where to
>> keep the key. How did you handle that?
> Simply. I use for password some random plpgsql message text and
> compile it. I though about GUC, and a
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> indent needs the typedef list. Maybe we can hack something based on
>> typedefs in the source code, instead of object files.
> The only think of is to grab typedefs from the object file and then also
> try to get them from the s
Brian Hurt wrote:
While we're blue skying things, I've had an idea for a sorting
algorithm kicking around for a couple of years that might be
interesting. It's a variation on heapsort to make it significantly
more block-friendly. I have no idea if the idea would work, or how
well it'd work,
On 21/12/2007, Merlin Moncure <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Dec 21, 2007 3:18 AM, Pavel Stehule <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I have similar patch and it works. There is two isues:
> >
> > * we missing column in pg_proc about state (not all procedures are
> > obfuscated), I solved it for plpgsl
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > I don't know how to make it output the symbol names like it seems to do
> > > for you.
> >
> > I dislike the object-file-based approach altogether, not least because
> > it appears to depend on unportable
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> I don't know how to make it output the symbol names like it seems to do
> for you.
>
> Having the typedef list in the script itself seems like a barrier for
> other people to contribute to this thing. I wonder if that can be
> changed so that the typedef is on a separate l
On Dec 21, 2007 3:18 AM, Pavel Stehule <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have similar patch and it works. There is two isues:
>
> * we missing column in pg_proc about state (not all procedures are
> obfuscated), I solved it for plpgsl with using probin.
I was hoping to avoid making any catalog or oth
Andrew Dunstan escribió:
>
> Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> I think this patch should fix it. I think win32.mak needs to be
>> similarly patched.
>
> Don't you also need to add pgsleep.o to $(OBJS) in the win32 stanza?
Hmm. Wow, that's silly. I introduced a hack in a Replicator's Makefile
to avoid h
On Fri, Dec 21, 2007 at 01:30:07AM -0500, Jaime Casanova wrote:
> On Dec 20, 2007 9:31 PM, Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Jaime Casanova escribió:
> >
> > > it doesn't compile on current head on mingw 5.1 and msys 1.0.10; of
> > > course, it doesn't compile on 8.2 neither in order to
I have similar patch and it works. There is two isues:
* we missing column in pg_proc about state (not all procedures are
obfuscated), I solved it for plpgsl with using probin.
* decrypt is expensive on language handler level. Every session have
to do it again and again, better decrypt in system c
31 matches
Mail list logo
