On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 1:23 PM, k...@rice.edu wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 12:58:18PM -0700, David Rees wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 12:13 PM, k...@rice.edu wrote:
>> > We have it working here with dspam-3.10.2 and postgresql-9.2.4.
>>
>> Interesting - what OS are you running? I wonder
On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 12:58:18PM -0700, David Rees wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 12:13 PM, k...@rice.edu wrote:
> > We have it working here with dspam-3.10.2 and postgresql-9.2.4.
>
> Interesting - what OS are you running? I wonder if it may be because I
> don't have dspam linked against the
On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 12:13 PM, k...@rice.edu wrote:
> We have it working here with dspam-3.10.2 and postgresql-9.2.4.
Interesting - what OS are you running? I wonder if it may be because I
don't have dspam linked against the same version of PostgreSQL. I have
two systems, one a CentOS 6 system
On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 11:28:57AM -0700, David Rees wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 6:06 AM, Chris Moules wrote:
> > NOTE: the patch that I sent was only for the single (repeated) error
> > that I was receiving. This was while hitting the DB via dspam_train.
> >
> > I have been evaluating all th
On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 12:13 PM, Tom Hendrikx wrote:
> On 13-06-13 20:28, David Rees wrote:
>> Is training actually working for you on PostgreSQL? It does not appear
>> to be working for me...
>>
>> See: http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_id=30708939
>>
>> Haven't had time to dig
On 13-06-13 20:28, David Rees wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 6:06 AM, Chris Moules wrote:
>> NOTE: the patch that I sent was only for the single (repeated) error
>> that I was receiving. This was while hitting the DB via dspam_train.
>>
>> I have been evaluating all the storage backends and foun
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 6:06 AM, Chris Moules wrote:
> NOTE: the patch that I sent was only for the single (repeated) error
> that I was receiving. This was while hitting the DB via dspam_train.
>
> I have been evaluating all the storage backends and found Hash to be the
> fastest, but seems buggy
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 3:53 AM, Tom Hendrikx wrote:
> This is already fixed some time ago, I think it was this commit [1].
> What version of dspam are you running, and which version of postgresql
> server?
I currently see this on dspam 3.10.2 and PostgreSQL 9.2.4 - both built
from source. I turn
On 12/06/13 14:51, Chris Moules wrote:
>
> Could it be that postgres is built with "escape_string_warning = on" ?
Just downloaded the source of postgres.
I found this in the HISTORY file when grep'ing for escape_string_warning
Migration to Version 8.2
...
* Set escape_string_warning to on
On 12/06/13 14:18, Thomas Preud'homme wrote:
> Le mercredi 12 juin 2013 14:10:25, Chris Moules a écrit :
>> Hello Tom,
>>
>> System is a Debian 7 test system dspam: 3.10.2 - backport from
>> testing postgresql: 9.1
>>
>> The line that I patched is still in git HEAD as-is. I can look
>> at re-bu
Le mercredi 12 juin 2013 14:10:25, Chris Moules a écrit :
> Hello Tom,
>
> System is a Debian 7 test system
> dspam: 3.10.2 - backport from testing
> postgresql: 9.1
>
> The line that I patched is still in git HEAD as-is. I can look at
> re-building my full-debug version and posting full output.
On 12/06/13 12:53, Tom Hendrikx wrote:
> On 06/12/2013 11:56 AM, Chris Moules wrote:
>> During some recent testing I was getting: 'WARNING: nonstandard
>> use of \\ in a string literal' 'HINT: Use the escape string
>> syntax for backslashes, e.g., E'\\'.'
>>
>> I believe the query in question
On 06/12/2013 11:56 AM, Chris Moules wrote:
> During some recent testing I was getting:
> 'WARNING: nonstandard use of \\ in a string literal'
> 'HINT: Use the escape string syntax for backslashes, e.g., E'\\'.'
>
> I believe the query in question was not updated since PgSQL 7 times.
>
> Patch
13 matches
Mail list logo
