Re: [PATCHES] [Patch] - Fix for bug #2558, InitDB failed to run
Sorry, Im not an expert, and I have the same win 2003 server installation problem, but dont know what to do with the tree .c files downloaded as a patch, can you please direct me on how to use the patch? Thanks ! Andrew Dunstan wrote: > > > > 1. a patch is generated by the program "diff" > 2. before we do anything, as Tom Lane says, we need verification of the > problem, preferably in writing from Microsoft. > > cheers > > andrew > > > dror wrote: >> >> 1. >> When saying: >> "Please submit the changes as patches, instead of the whole files". >> Do you mean to send each file seperately? or other issues as well? >> 2. >> The change was test and design for 8.1.14, but as far as I see >> it is also true for any other version. >> Of course merge is needed in case that the files were changed >> since then, however , due to the fact that it is only few rows >> it will be easy to do it. >> 3. >> Alvaro wrote: >> "it may be useful to lose the redirection only on the >>cases where it fails, so we still have reasonable behavior on >> non-broken >>platforms" >> >> Nice idea, but it is really doesn't matter: on other platform >> than win32, the code left unchanged! the fix is only relevant >> for win32 on which (as I explained) the MSI installer (if used) >> redirect the output by default to a log file. >> >> Regards >> Dror >> ------------------------------------ >> >> > Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2006 12:40:25 -0400 >> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > CC: pgsql-patches@postgresql.org >> > Subject: Re: [PATCHES] [Patch] - Fix for bug #2558, InitDB failed to >> run on windows 2003 >> > >> > dror wrote: >> > >> > > There were two options to solve this issue: >> > > >> > > Create a new file , grant a write permission for the Postgres user >> > > and redirect the output to that file. (EnterpriseDB use this method) >> > > Canceling the redirection at all. >> > > >> > > I choose the second option and omit the redirection in any case that >> > > it windows machine and the redirection was sent to DEVNULL. >> > > >> > > The only files that I changed are: initDB.c, exec.c and pg_ctl.c >> > >> > Please submit the changes as patches, instead of the whole files. >> Also, >> > please specify which branch do these patches apply -- is this for 8.1, >> > or for the current development code? When checked against the 8.1 >> > pg_ctl.c, the file you sent only contains a regression for a bug fix, >> > and no change related to what you describe above. >> > >> > On the other hand, it may be useful to lose the redirection only on the >> > cases where it fails, so we still have reasonable behavior on >> non-broken >> > platforms. Or maybe there's a better solution. >> > >> > -- >> > >> Alvaro Herrera >> http://www.CommandPrompt.com/ >> > PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support >> >> >> >> Express yourself instantly with Windows Live Messenger! Windows Live >> Messenger! >> <http://imagine-msn.com/messenger/launch80/default.aspx?locale=en-us&source=joinmsncom/messenger> > > > ---(end of broadcast)--- > TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? > >http://archives.postgresql.org > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/-PatchFix-for-bug---2558%2C--InitDB-failed-to-run-on-windows-2003-tf2103710.html#a8164273 Sent from the PostgreSQL - patches mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
Re: [PATCHES] [Patch] - Fix for bug #2558, InitDB failed to run
Andreas Pflug <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > what issues might arise if the output is redirected to a legal tmp file? Well, (1) finding a place to put the temp file, ie a writable directory; (2) ensuring the file is removed afterwards; (3) not exposing the user to security hazards due to unsafe use of a temp file (ye olde overwrite-a-symlink risk). Perhaps a few more I didn't think of. It's not a trivial change, and the evidence presented so far hasn't convinced me that we need to put in the effort. regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
Re: [PATCHES] [Patch] - Fix for bug #2558, InitDB failed to run
Andreas Pflug wrote: > Bruce Momjian wrote: > > Andreas Pflug wrote: > >> Tom Lane wrote: > >>> Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >>> > I am more than somewhat perplexed as to why the NUL device should be a > security risk ... what are they thinking?? > > >>> Frankly, I don't believe it; even Microsoft can't be that stupid. > >>> And I can't find any suggestion that they've done this in a google > >>> search. I think the OP is misdiagnosing his problem. > >>> > >> An older message suggests that a service pack induced this problem, per > >> MS. I just tried it as non-admin on a W2K3 machine with recent hotfixes, > >> and the command "dir >nul" _did_ work for me. > >> Though neglected, it still sounds like a virus scanner issue to me. > > > > Yes, it seems we will need more information on this. We need someone at > > a win32 command prompt to show us a "> nul" failure. > > OTOH, > what issues might arise if the output is redirected to a legal tmp file? No idea, but we aren't going to change the code without more facts. We don't have the resources to be making code changes without concrete information. -- Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] EnterpriseDBhttp://www.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
Re: [PATCHES] [Patch] - Fix for bug #2558, InitDB failed to run
Bruce Momjian wrote: > Andreas Pflug wrote: >> Tom Lane wrote: >>> Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>> I am more than somewhat perplexed as to why the NUL device should be a security risk ... what are they thinking?? >>> Frankly, I don't believe it; even Microsoft can't be that stupid. >>> And I can't find any suggestion that they've done this in a google >>> search. I think the OP is misdiagnosing his problem. >>> >> An older message suggests that a service pack induced this problem, per >> MS. I just tried it as non-admin on a W2K3 machine with recent hotfixes, >> and the command "dir >nul" _did_ work for me. >> Though neglected, it still sounds like a virus scanner issue to me. > > Yes, it seems we will need more information on this. We need someone at > a win32 command prompt to show us a "> nul" failure. OTOH, what issues might arise if the output is redirected to a legal tmp file? Regards, Andreas ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
Re: [PATCHES] [Patch] - Fix for bug #2558, InitDB failed to run
Andreas Pflug wrote: > Tom Lane wrote: > > Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > >> I am more than somewhat perplexed as to why the NUL device should be a > >> security risk ... what are they thinking?? > >> > > > > Frankly, I don't believe it; even Microsoft can't be that stupid. > > And I can't find any suggestion that they've done this in a google > > search. I think the OP is misdiagnosing his problem. > > > An older message suggests that a service pack induced this problem, per > MS. I just tried it as non-admin on a W2K3 machine with recent hotfixes, > and the command "dir >nul" _did_ work for me. > Though neglected, it still sounds like a virus scanner issue to me. Yes, it seems we will need more information on this. We need someone at a win32 command prompt to show us a "> nul" failure. -- Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] EnterpriseDBhttp://www.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
Re: [PATCHES] [Patch] - Fix for bug #2558, InitDB failed to run
Tom Lane wrote: > Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> I am more than somewhat perplexed as to why the NUL device should be a >> security risk ... what are they thinking?? >> > > Frankly, I don't believe it; even Microsoft can't be that stupid. > And I can't find any suggestion that they've done this in a google > search. I think the OP is misdiagnosing his problem. > An older message suggests that a service pack induced this problem, per MS. I just tried it as non-admin on a W2K3 machine with recent hotfixes, and the command "dir >nul" _did_ work for me. Though neglected, it still sounds like a virus scanner issue to me. Regards, Andreas ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
Re: [PATCHES] [Patch] - Fix for bug #2558, InitDB failed to run
Hi Andrew, Regarding to your comments: > 1. a patch is generated by the program "diff"I will do it ,if needed> 2. before we do anything, as Tom Lane says, we need verification of the > problem, preferably in writing from Microsoft.I do understand that, but, de-facto, the current implementation does not work, canceling the redirection (or open a log file) is not a matter of changing the OS behavior, therefore I don't see why a formal verification from Microsoft is needed.When this issue will be revealed in more and more system, it can be harmless to postgress reputation and critical problems for the end users.In addition to the above, as James Hughes have already mention before at item #2268 (http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-03/msg00012.php):He tried to get answers from microsoft but didn't get any respond. Anyway, For my own version, I solve the issue and built a private version, if you still want me to publish the patch (Just in case) I will do the diff and the effort needed, I don't think that Microsoft respond is needed in this case because it is implementation decision. Regards; Dror > Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2006 17:42:58 -0400> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; pgsql-patches@postgresql.org> Subject: Re: [PATCHES] [Patch] - Fix for bug #2558, InitDB failed to run> > > > 1. a patch is generated by the program "diff"> 2. before we do anything, as Tom Lane says, we need verification of the > problem, preferably in writing from Microsoft.> > cheers> > andrew> > > dror wrote:> >> > 1.> > When saying:> > "Please submit the changes as patches, instead of the whole files". > > Do you mean to send each file seperately? or other issues as well?> > 2.> > The change was test and design for 8.1.14, but as far as I see> > it is also true for any other version.> > Of course merge is needed in case that the files were changed> > since then, however , due to the fact that it is only few rows> > it will be easy to do it.> > 3.> > Alvaro wrote:> > "it may be useful to lose the redirection only on the> >cases where it fails, so we still have reasonable behavior on non-broken> >platforms"> >> > Nice idea, but it is really doesn't matter: on other platform> > than win32, the code left unchanged! the fix is only relevant> > for win32 on which (as I explained) the MSI installer (if used)> > redirect the output by default to a log file.> >> > Regards> > Dror> > ----------------> >> > > Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2006 12:40:25 -0400> > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > CC: pgsql-patches@postgresql.org> > > Subject: Re: [PATCHES] [Patch] - Fix for bug #2558, InitDB failed to > > run on windows 2003> > >> > > dror wrote:> > >> > > > There were two options to solve this issue:> > > > > > > > Create a new file , grant a write permission for the Postgres user> > > > and redirect the output to that file. (EnterpriseDB use this method)> > > > Canceling the redirection at all.> > > > > > > > I choose the second option and omit the redirection in any case that> > > > it windows machine and the redirection was sent to DEVNULL.> > > > > > > > The only files that I changed are: initDB.c, exec.c and pg_ctl.c> > >> > > Please submit the changes as patches, instead of the whole files. Also,> > > please specify which branch do these patches apply -- is this for 8.1,> > > or for the current development code? When checked against the 8.1> > > pg_ctl.c, the file you sent only contains a regression for a bug fix,> > > and no change related to what you describe above.> > >> > > On the other hand, it may be useful to lose the redirection only on the> > > cases where it fails, so we still have reasonable behavior on non-broken> > > platforms. Or maybe there's a better solution.> > >> > > -- > > > > > Alvaro Herrerahttp://www.CommandPrompt.com/> > > PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support> >> >> > > > Express yourself instantly with Windows Live Messenger! Windows Live > > Messenger! > > > With MSN Spaces email straight to your blog. Upload jokes, photos and more. It's free! It's free!
Re: [PATCHES] [Patch] - Fix for bug #2558, InitDB failed to run
1. a patch is generated by the program "diff" 2. before we do anything, as Tom Lane says, we need verification of the problem, preferably in writing from Microsoft. cheers andrew dror wrote: 1. When saying: "Please submit the changes as patches, instead of the whole files". Do you mean to send each file seperately? or other issues as well? 2. The change was test and design for 8.1.14, but as far as I see it is also true for any other version. Of course merge is needed in case that the files were changed since then, however , due to the fact that it is only few rows it will be easy to do it. 3. Alvaro wrote: "it may be useful to lose the redirection only on the cases where it fails, so we still have reasonable behavior on non-broken platforms" Nice idea, but it is really doesn't matter: on other platform than win32, the code left unchanged! the fix is only relevant for win32 on which (as I explained) the MSI installer (if used) redirect the output by default to a log file. Regards Dror > Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2006 12:40:25 -0400 > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > CC: pgsql-patches@postgresql.org > Subject: Re: [PATCHES] [Patch] - Fix for bug #2558, InitDB failed to run on windows 2003 > > dror wrote: > > > There were two options to solve this issue: > > > > Create a new file , grant a write permission for the Postgres user > > and redirect the output to that file. (EnterpriseDB use this method) > > Canceling the redirection at all. > > > > I choose the second option and omit the redirection in any case that > > it windows machine and the redirection was sent to DEVNULL. > > > > The only files that I changed are: initDB.c, exec.c and pg_ctl.c > > Please submit the changes as patches, instead of the whole files. Also, > please specify which branch do these patches apply -- is this for 8.1, > or for the current development code? When checked against the 8.1 > pg_ctl.c, the file you sent only contains a regression for a bug fix, > and no change related to what you describe above. > > On the other hand, it may be useful to lose the redirection only on the > cases where it fails, so we still have reasonable behavior on non-broken > platforms. Or maybe there's a better solution. > > -- > Alvaro Herrerahttp://www.CommandPrompt.com/ > PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support Express yourself instantly with Windows Live Messenger! Windows Live Messenger! <http://imagine-msn.com/messenger/launch80/default.aspx?locale=en-us&source=joinmsncom/messenger> ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
Re: [PATCHES] [Patch] - Fix for bug #2558, InitDB failed to run
When saying:"Please submit the changes as patches, instead of the whole files". Do you mean to send each file seperately? or other issues as well? The change was test and design for 8.1.14, but as far as I see it is also true for any other version.Of course merge is needed in case that the files were changed since then, however , due to the fact that it is only few rows it will be easy to do it. Alvaro wrote: "it may be useful to lose the redirection only on the cases where it fails, so we still have reasonable behavior on non-broken platforms"Nice idea, but it is really doesn't matter: on other platform than win32, the code left unchanged! the fix is only relevant for win32 on which (as I explained) the MSI installer (if used) redirect the output by default to a log file. Regards Dror > Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2006 12:40:25 -0400> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> CC: pgsql-patches@postgresql.org> Subject: Re: [PATCHES] [Patch] - Fix for bug #2558, InitDB failed to run on windows 2003> > dror wrote:> > > There were two options to solve this issue:> > > > Create a new file , grant a write permission for the Postgres user> > and redirect the output to that file. (EnterpriseDB use this method)> > Canceling the redirection at all.> > > > I choose the second option and omit the redirection in any case that> > it windows machine and the redirection was sent to DEVNULL.> > > > The only files that I changed are: initDB.c, exec.c and pg_ctl.c> > Please submit the changes as patches, instead of the whole files. Also,> please specify which branch do these patches apply -- is this for 8.1,> or for the current development code? When checked against the 8.1> pg_ctl.c, the file you sent only contains a regression for a bug fix,> and no change related to what you describe above.> > On the other hand, it may be useful to lose the redirection only on the> cases where it fails, so we still have reasonable behavior on non-broken> platforms. Or maybe there's a better solution.> > -- > Alvaro Herrerahttp://www.CommandPrompt.com/> PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 supportExpress yourself instantly with Windows Live Messenger! Windows Live Messenger!
Re: [PATCHES] [Patch] - Fix for bug #2558, InitDB failed to run
Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I am more than somewhat perplexed as to why the NUL device should be a > security risk ... what are they thinking?? Frankly, I don't believe it; even Microsoft can't be that stupid. And I can't find any suggestion that they've done this in a google search. I think the OP is misdiagnosing his problem. regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
Re: [PATCHES] [Patch] - Fix for bug #2558, InitDB failed to run
Alvaro Herrera wrote: dror wrote: There were two options to solve this issue: Create a new file , grant a write permission for the Postgres user and redirect the output to that file. (EnterpriseDB use this method) Canceling the redirection at all. I choose the second option and omit the redirection in any case that it windows machine and the redirection was sent to DEVNULL. The only files that I changed are: initDB.c, exec.c and pg_ctl.c Please submit the changes as patches, instead of the whole files. Also, please specify which branch do these patches apply -- is this for 8.1, or for the current development code? When checked against the 8.1 pg_ctl.c, the file you sent only contains a regression for a bug fix, and no change related to what you describe above. On the other hand, it may be useful to lose the redirection only on the cases where it fails, so we still have reasonable behavior on non-broken platforms. Or maybe there's a better solution. I am inclined to say we should make it into a runtime test and use a tmpfile on Windows if the test fails. I am more than somewhat perplexed as to why the NUL device should be a security risk ... what are they thinking?? The case that bothers me more is where input is redirected - will that also work? cheers andrew ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
Re: [PATCHES] [Patch] - Fix for bug #2558, InitDB failed to run on windows 2003
dror wrote: > There were two options to solve this issue: > > Create a new file , grant a write permission for the Postgres user > and redirect the output to that file. (EnterpriseDB use this method) > Canceling the redirection at all. > > I choose the second option and omit the redirection in any case that > it windows machine and the redirection was sent to DEVNULL. > > The only files that I changed are: initDB.c, exec.c and pg_ctl.c Please submit the changes as patches, instead of the whole files. Also, please specify which branch do these patches apply -- is this for 8.1, or for the current development code? When checked against the 8.1 pg_ctl.c, the file you sent only contains a regression for a bug fix, and no change related to what you describe above. On the other hand, it may be useful to lose the redirection only on the cases where it fails, so we still have reasonable behavior on non-broken platforms. Or maybe there's a better solution. -- Alvaro Herrerahttp://www.CommandPrompt.com/ PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
