[HACKERS] Prepared Xacts and Vacuum question

2006-02-19 Thread Satoshi Nagayasu
Hi all, When I was playing with VACUUM, I found that if I have prepared xacts on the database A, I can't vacuum full on the database B. Scenario: 1.) Prepare some transaction on testdb database. 2.) Create database pgbench. 3.) Run pgbench -i to load pgbench data on pgbench database 4.) Delete

Re: [HACKERS] Pgfoundry and gborg: shut one down

2006-02-19 Thread Dave Page
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Joshua D. Drake Sent: Sun 2/19/2006 12:35 AM To: Bruce Momjian Cc: Christopher Browne; pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Pgfoundry and gborg: shut one down This is not get everything everyone wants before

Re: [HACKERS] possible design bug with PQescapeString()

2006-02-19 Thread Florian Weimer
* Tatsuo Ishii: Users can input value for var from a web form. The attacker inputs following string: (0x95+0x27);DELETE FROM members;-- where 0x95+0x27 is actually a SJIS mutibyte KANJI. Programmer applies PQescapeString() to it and gets: 0x95+0x27+0x27;DELETE FROM members;-- Uh-oh,

Re: [HACKERS] possible design bug with PQescapeString()

2006-02-19 Thread Tatsuo Ishii
* Tatsuo Ishii: Users can input value for var from a web form. The attacker inputs following string: (0x95+0x27);DELETE FROM members;-- where 0x95+0x27 is actually a SJIS mutibyte KANJI. Programmer applies PQescapeString() to it and gets: 0x95+0x27+0x27;DELETE FROM members;--

Re: [HACKERS] possible design bug with PQescapeString()

2006-02-19 Thread Florian Weimer
* Tatsuo Ishii: Uh-oh, this is my fault. PQescapeString should escape all characters greater than 126. Unfortunately, there is nothing we can do about this in the current function because tha twould need four times the lenggth of the input string (plus one). Drat. Please don't do that.

Re: [HACKERS] possible design bug with PQescapeString()

2006-02-19 Thread Tatsuo Ishii
Uh-oh, this is my fault. PQescapeString should escape all characters greater than 126. Unfortunately, there is nothing we can do about this in the current function because tha twould need four times the lenggth of the input string (plus one). Drat. Please don't do that. That would

Re: [HACKERS] Adding an ignore list to pg_restore

2006-02-19 Thread Martin Pitt
Hi Tom! Tom Lane [2006-02-18 14:34 -0500]: Hm. Rather than a variant of the -L facility (which is hard to use, and I don't see your proposal being much easier), maybe what's wanted is just a flag saying don't try to restore data into any table whose creation command fails. Maybe that should

Re: [HACKERS] Generating config stuff from single source

2006-02-19 Thread Jim C. Nasby
On Thu, Feb 16, 2006 at 10:52:19AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Am Donnerstag, 16. Februar 2006 02:50 schrieb Tom Lane: That's fine for users, but what new demands are you about to place on developers? Does this require tools not already needed in order

Re: [HACKERS] Pgfoundry and gborg: shut one down

2006-02-19 Thread Thomas Hallgren
Dave Page wrote: Moving CVS is not a problem - each project has their own repo on both systems. The problem is moving all the database stuff such as the bug trackers and todo lists, for which I'm told there are no working scripts. The other one that caused me great pain when I moved psqlODBC

Re: [HACKERS] Domains and supporting functions

2006-02-19 Thread Martijn van Oosterhout
On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 09:27:47PM -0800, elein wrote: I've got a domain based on a text type. I've overridden the equal operator with lower(text) = lower(text). I created a table containing my new domain type and can see that the equals operator is not being used to determine uniqueness.

Re: [HACKERS] Adding an ignore list to pg_restore, prototype patch #1

2006-02-19 Thread Martin Pitt
Hi again, Tom Lane [2006-02-18 14:34 -0500]: The core problem is that we want to not restore objects (mainly tables) in the destination database which already exist. Why is this a problem? It's already the default behavior --- the creation commands fail but pg_restore keeps going.

Re: [HACKERS] Adding an ignore list to pg_restore, prototype patch #1

2006-02-19 Thread Martin Pitt
Hi again, Meh, the list server didn't like the attached test script, so I put it here: http://people.debian.org/~mpitt/test-pg_restore-existing.sh Martin -- Martin Pitthttp://www.piware.de Ubuntu Developer http://www.ubuntu.com Debian Developer http://www.debian.org In a world

[HACKERS] pg_service.conf

2006-02-19 Thread Mark Woodward
On Fri, Feb 03, 2006 at 08:05:48AM -0500, Mark Woodward wrote: Like I said, in this thread of posts, yes there are ways of doing this, and I've been doing it for years. It is just one of the rough eges that I think could be smoother. (in php) pg_connect(dbname=geo host=dbserver); Could

Re: [HACKERS] pg_service.conf

2006-02-19 Thread Simon Riggs
On Sun, 2006-02-19 at 10:00 -0500, Mark Woodward wrote: On Fri, Feb 03, 2006 at 08:05:48AM -0500, Mark Woodward wrote: Like I said, in this thread of posts, yes there are ways of doing this, and I've been doing it for years. It is just one of the rough eges that I think could be

Re: [HACKERS] pg_service.conf

2006-02-19 Thread Martijn van Oosterhout
On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 10:00:01AM -0500, Mark Woodward wrote: It turns out what you like actually exists, lookup the service parameter in the connectdb string. It will read the values for the server, port, etc from a pg_service.conf file. There is an example in the tree but it looks

Re: [HACKERS] pg_service.conf

2006-02-19 Thread Douglas McNaught
Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: A server-side (i.e. centrally managed) name server seems like an improvement over the client-side solutions described, IMHO, but I'd leave it to others to describe how that might work. (e.g. DNS is a better solution than multiple distributed /etc/hosts

Re: [HACKERS] pg_service.conf

2006-02-19 Thread Martijn van Oosterhout
On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 09:58:01AM -0500, Douglas McNaught wrote: Simon Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: A server-side (i.e. centrally managed) name server seems like an improvement over the client-side solutions described, IMHO, but I'd leave it to others to describe how that might work.

Re: [HACKERS] pg_service.conf

2006-02-19 Thread Mark Woodward
On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 10:00:01AM -0500, Mark Woodward wrote: It turns out what you like actually exists, lookup the service parameter in the connectdb string. It will read the values for the server, port, etc from a pg_service.conf file. There is an example in the tree but it looks

Re: [HACKERS] pg_service.conf

2006-02-19 Thread Mark Woodward
On Sun, 2006-02-19 at 10:00 -0500, Mark Woodward wrote: On Fri, Feb 03, 2006 at 08:05:48AM -0500, Mark Woodward wrote: Like I said, in this thread of posts, yes there are ways of doing this, and I've been doing it for years. It is just one of the rough eges that I think could be

Re: [HACKERS] pg_service.conf

2006-02-19 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Mark Woodward wrote: Don't get me wrong, DNS, as it is designed, is PERFECT for the distributed nature of the internet, but replication of fairly static data under the control of a central authority (the admin) is better. What about this zeroconf/bonjour stuff? I'm not familiar with it, but

Re: [HACKERS] pg_service.conf

2006-02-19 Thread Martijn van Oosterhout
On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 04:56:11PM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote: Mark Woodward wrote: Don't get me wrong, DNS, as it is designed, is PERFECT for the distributed nature of the internet, but replication of fairly static data under the control of a central authority (the admin) is better.

Re: [HACKERS] pg_service.conf

2006-02-19 Thread Douglas McNaught
Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Mark Woodward wrote: Don't get me wrong, DNS, as it is designed, is PERFECT for the distributed nature of the internet, but replication of fairly static data under the control of a central authority (the admin) is better. What about this

Re: [HACKERS] pg_service.conf

2006-02-19 Thread Douglas McNaught
Mark Woodward [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: DNS isn't always a better solution than /etc/hosts, both have their pros and cons. The /etc/hosts file is very useful for instantaneous, reliable, and redundent name lookups. DNS services, espcially in a large service environment can get bogged down.

Re: [HACKERS] Prepared Xacts and Vacuum question

2006-02-19 Thread Tom Lane
Satoshi Nagayasu [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: When I was playing with VACUUM, I found that if I have prepared xacts on the database A, I can't vacuum full on the database B. A prepared xact is the same as an open xact as far as vacuum is concerned. It's a bad idea to sit on either open or

Re: [HACKERS] possible design bug with PQescapeString()

2006-02-19 Thread Tom Lane
Florian Weimer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Uh-oh, this is my fault. PQescapeString should escape all characters greater than 126. No, that doesn't work, because the de-escaping on the backend side happens *after* conversion to the backend encoding. If you insert escapes into the middle of

Re: [HACKERS] Config file for psql

2006-02-19 Thread Jim C. Nasby
On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 02:49:08PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: Perhaps we should make a concerted effort to split the libpq docs into a section for programmers vs one for users, the latter part covering the libpq behavior that is interesting to users of a libpq-based app. .pgpass, pg_service, the

Re: [HACKERS] possible design bug with PQescapeString()

2006-02-19 Thread Martijn van Oosterhout
On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 12:13:48PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: Florian Weimer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Uh-oh, this is my fault. PQescapeString should escape all characters greater than 126. No, that doesn't work, because the de-escaping on the backend side happens *after* conversion to the

Re: [HACKERS] pg_service.conf

2006-02-19 Thread Tom Lane
Martijn van Oosterhout kleptog@svana.org writes: I think the major issue is that most such systems (like RFC2782) deal only with finding the hostname:port of the service and don't deal with usernames/passwords/dbname. What we want is a system that not only finds the service, but tells you

Re: [HACKERS] pg_service.conf

2006-02-19 Thread Mark Woodward
Martijn van Oosterhout kleptog@svana.org writes: I think the major issue is that most such systems (like RFC2782) deal only with finding the hostname:port of the service and don't deal with usernames/passwords/dbname. What we want is a system that not only finds the service, but tells you

Re: [HACKERS] pg_service.conf

2006-02-19 Thread Mark Woodward
Mark Woodward wrote: Don't get me wrong, DNS, as it is designed, is PERFECT for the distributed nature of the internet, but replication of fairly static data under the control of a central authority (the admin) is better. What about this zeroconf/bonjour stuff? I'm not familiar with it, but

Re: [HACKERS] pg_service.conf

2006-02-19 Thread Mark Woodward
Mark Woodward [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: DNS isn't always a better solution than /etc/hosts, both have their pros and cons. The /etc/hosts file is very useful for instantaneous, reliable, and redundent name lookups. DNS services, espcially in a large service environment can get bogged down.

Re: [HACKERS] Domains and supporting functions

2006-02-19 Thread elein
On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 01:26:31AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: elein [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I've got a domain based on a text type. I've overridden the equal operator with lower(text) = lower(text). This won't work, you need to make a type instead. Actually I can do and have done this.

Re: [HACKERS] Domains and supporting functions

2006-02-19 Thread Martijn van Oosterhout
On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 10:34:02AM -0800, elein wrote: Actually I can do and have done this. It is being tested now. I did create an opclass. It creates a UNIQUE index just fine for the type using the lower() functionality. *If* it passes all of my testing I'll publish it tomorrow on

Re: [HACKERS] pg_service.conf

2006-02-19 Thread Douglas McNaught
Mark Woodward [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Um, is there something wrong with having multiple DNS servers in resolv.conf? Other than having to time out on #1 before you try #2? I'm genuinely curious. What is the timeout of that DNS lookup, before it goes to the second DNS server? I think on

Re: [HACKERS] Domains and supporting functions

2006-02-19 Thread elein
On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 07:57:42PM +0100, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 10:34:02AM -0800, elein wrote: Actually I can do and have done this. It is being tested now. I did create an opclass. It creates a UNIQUE index just fine for the type using the lower()

[HACKERS] postgresql query string length limit

2006-02-19 Thread uwcssa
I found any query exceeds 4096 charactors will be pruned automatically. i am wondering which knob should i change to make it larger , say, 1 charactors. i searched for a while but was not able to find it online. so if anyone has a quick nswer that will be highly appreciated.

Re: [HACKERS] postgresql query string length limit

2006-02-19 Thread Douglas McNaught
uwcssa [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I found any query exceeds 4096 charactors will be pruned automatically. i am wondering which knob should i change to make it larger , say, 1 charactors. i searched for a while but was not able to find it online. so if anyone has a quick nswer that will

Re: [HACKERS] Domains and supporting functions

2006-02-19 Thread Martijn van Oosterhout
On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 12:59:35PM -0800, elein wrote: On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 07:57:42PM +0100, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: ORDER BY x ASC is a synonym for ORDER BY x USING . That's the way it is currently. To use ORDER BY by itself you need to call your operators and . This does

Re: [HACKERS] Pgfoundry and gborg: shut one down

2006-02-19 Thread Luke Lonergan
FYI - as a positive enhancement, Greenplum donated a beefy server to host pgFoundry. - Luke On 2/18/06 10:34 AM, Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thomas Hallgren [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Bruce Momjian wrote: Having run had both pgfoundary and gborg for several years, I think we have to

Re: [HACKERS] Domains and supporting functions

2006-02-19 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 10:34:02AM -0800, elein wrote: Actually I can do and have done this. It is being tested now. I did create an opclass. It creates a UNIQUE index just fine for the type using the lower() functionality. *If* it passes all of my

Re: [HACKERS] Domains and supporting functions

2006-02-19 Thread elein
On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 10:29:35PM +0100, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 12:59:35PM -0800, elein wrote: On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 07:57:42PM +0100, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: ORDER BY x ASC is a synonym for ORDER BY x USING . That's the way it is currently. To use

Re: [HACKERS] Domains and supporting functions

2006-02-19 Thread Martijn van Oosterhout
On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 04:35:56PM -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote: Have you looked at the code of citext? Unless I'm misreading, it creates a lowercase copy of each string for each comparison. And it doesn't look to me like it's encoding/locale aware. Its cilower function isn't terribly great

[HACKERS] Fix to CVE-2006-0553 for 8.1.1

2006-02-19 Thread Albert Chin
Does the patch below look like the correct fix to CVE-2006-0553 if running 8.1.1? I just scanned cvs log from the 8.1 branch, looking for CVE-2006-0553 and picked out the diffs. -- albert chin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) -- snip snip Index: src/backend/commands/variable.c

Re: [HACKERS] Fix to CVE-2006-0553 for 8.1.1

2006-02-19 Thread Tom Lane
Albert Chin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Does the patch below look like the correct fix to CVE-2006-0553 if running 8.1.1? Why in the world would you not install 8.1.3 instead? Or are you hoping to get burnt by one of the *other* bugs in 8.1.1? regards, tom lane

Re: [HACKERS] pg_service.conf

2006-02-19 Thread Steve Atkins
On Feb 19, 2006, at 10:59 AM, Mark Woodward wrote: Mark Woodward [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: DNS isn't always a better solution than /etc/hosts, both have their pros and cons. The /etc/hosts file is very useful for instantaneous, reliable, and redundent name lookups. DNS services, espcially

Re: [HACKERS] Fix to CVE-2006-0553 for 8.1.1

2006-02-19 Thread Albert Chin
On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 05:14:32PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: Albert Chin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Does the patch below look like the correct fix to CVE-2006-0553 if running 8.1.1? Why in the world would you not install 8.1.3 instead? Or are you hoping to get burnt by one of the *other*

Re: [HACKERS] Domains and supporting functions

2006-02-19 Thread Martijn van Oosterhout
On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 01:36:41PM -0800, elein wrote: On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 10:29:35PM +0100, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 12:59:35PM -0800, elein wrote: On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 07:57:42PM +0100, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: ORDER BY x ASC is a synonym for

Re: [HACKERS] postgresql query string length limit

2006-02-19 Thread uwcssa
I am using version 8.0.3. i installed using the --without-readline option. is there a quick workaround? On 2/19/06, Douglas McNaught [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: uwcssa [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I found any query exceeds 4096 charactors will be pruned automatically. i am wondering

Re: [HACKERS] postgresql query string length limit

2006-02-19 Thread Douglas McNaught
uwcssa [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I am using version 8.0.3. i installed using the --without-readline option. What client are you using? is there a quick workaround? The limit shouldn't be there. If you can post a test case that demonstrates the problem, perhaps someone can help.

[HACKERS] AC_REPLACE_FUNCS([getaddrinfo]) in 8.1.3

2006-02-19 Thread Albert Chin
AC_REPLACE_FUNCS([getaddrinfo]) won't correctly detect getaddrinfo on Tru64 UNIX because the function doesn't exist under that name in libc. From netdb.h: #if defined (_SOCKADDR_LEN) || defined (_XOPEN_SOURCE_EXTENDED) #define getaddrinfo ngetaddrinfo #else #define getaddrinfo ogetaddrinfo

Re: [HACKERS] Prepared Xacts and Vacuum question

2006-02-19 Thread Satoshi Nagayasu
On 2/20/06, Tom Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A prepared xact is the same as an open xact as far as vacuum is concerned. It's a bad idea to sit on either open or prepared xacts for long periods ... I completely understand that, however it can be occured... Prepared xacts never die... I

Re: [HACKERS] Domains and supporting functions

2006-02-19 Thread elein
On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 11:34:21PM +0100, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 01:36:41PM -0800, elein wrote: On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 10:29:35PM +0100, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 12:59:35PM -0800, elein wrote: On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 07:57:42PM

Re: [HACKERS] postgresql query string length limit

2006-02-19 Thread Mark Kirkwood
uwcssa wrote: I am using version 8.0.3. i installed using the --without-readline option. Platform and os version would be good too :-), along with the client you are using to elicit this behavior (e.g, psql, Pgadmin etc). Cheers Mark ---(end of

Re: [HACKERS] postgresql query string length limit

2006-02-19 Thread uwcssa
i am using psql client. On Fedora core (linux core: 2.4.20-8 ) as well on Suze 10.0 (core: 2.6.13-15.7-smp). Both has the same problem. thanks /19/06, Mark Kirkwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: uwcssa wrote: I am using version 8.0.3. i installed using the --without-readline option.

Re: [HACKERS] postgresql query string length limit

2006-02-19 Thread Douglas McNaught
uwcssa [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: i am using psql client. On Fedora core (linux core: 2.4.20-8 ) as well on Suze 10.0 (core: 2.6.13-15.7-smp). Both has the same problem. Please send a test case (shell script that shows the behavior). I can do $ psql -f foo.sql doug where 'foo.sql'

Re: [HACKERS] Fix to CVE-2006-0553 for 8.1.1

2006-02-19 Thread Tom Lane
Albert Chin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 05:14:32PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: Why in the world would you not install 8.1.3 instead? Or are you hoping to get burnt by one of the *other* bugs in 8.1.1? We've already deployed 8.1.1 to some customers. We will offer 8.1.3 but

Re: [HACKERS] [PERFORM] Need pointers to standard pg database(s) for testing

2006-02-19 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
Not really, but you can check out the sample databases project: http://pgfoundry.org/projects/dbsamples/ Chris Ron wrote: I assume we have such? Ron ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings

Re: [HACKERS] AC_REPLACE_FUNCS([getaddrinfo]) in 8.1.3

2006-02-19 Thread Tom Lane
Albert Chin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: AC_REPLACE_FUNCS([getaddrinfo]) won't correctly detect getaddrinfo on Tru64 UNIX because the function doesn't exist under that name in libc. We changed that code specifically so it *would* work on Tru64 --- see this thread:

Re: [HACKERS] AC_REPLACE_FUNCS([getaddrinfo]) in 8.1.3

2006-02-19 Thread Albert Chin
On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 09:02:48PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: Albert Chin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: AC_REPLACE_FUNCS([getaddrinfo]) won't correctly detect getaddrinfo on Tru64 UNIX because the function doesn't exist under that name in libc. We changed that code specifically so it *would* work

Re: [HACKERS] AC_REPLACE_FUNCS([getaddrinfo]) in 8.1.3

2006-02-19 Thread Tom Lane
Albert Chin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 09:02:48PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: We changed that code specifically so it *would* work on Tru64 --- see this thread: http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2006-01/msg00511.php From my reading, no completed patch was posted

Re: [HACKERS] AC_REPLACE_FUNCS([getaddrinfo]) in 8.1.3

2006-02-19 Thread Albert Chin
On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 09:56:20PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: Albert Chin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: AC_REPLACE_FUNCS([getaddrinfo]) will not detect getaddrinfo() on Tru64 UNIX because getaddrinfo is not in libc. Hmm, where is it then? getaddrinfo is a macro in netdb.h: #if defined

Re: [HACKERS] Pgfoundry and gborg: shut one down

2006-02-19 Thread Jeroen T. Vermeulen
On Sun, February 19, 2006 05:10, Bruce Momjian wrote: I don't care what direction we go, just kill one. Speaking for libpqxx, my only concern with that is the mailing list. Would those have to move to different addresses--or conversely, would a forced migration make it much easier to move

Re: [HACKERS] Domains and supporting functions

2006-02-19 Thread elein
On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 10:34:02AM -0800, elein wrote: On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 01:26:31AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: elein [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I've got a domain based on a text type. I've overridden the equal operator with lower(text) = lower(text). This won't work, you need to

Re: [HACKERS] Pgfoundry and gborg: shut one down

2006-02-19 Thread Marc G. Fournier
On Mon, 20 Feb 2006, Jeroen T. Vermeulen wrote: On Sun, February 19, 2006 05:10, Bruce Momjian wrote: I don't care what direction we go, just kill one. Speaking for libpqxx, my only concern with that is the mailing list. Would those have to move to different addresses--or conversely, would

Re: [HACKERS] AC_REPLACE_FUNCS([getaddrinfo]) in 8.1.3

2006-02-19 Thread Tom Lane
Albert Chin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 09:56:20PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: Hmm, where is it then? getaddrinfo is a macro in netdb.h: Yes, we know that. The question was where does the macro point. The solution is to either revert to the 8.1.1 code (my recommendation)

Re: [HACKERS] [PERFORM] Need pointers to standard pg database(s) for

2006-02-19 Thread Christopher Kings-Lynne
Relating to this. If anyone can find govt or other free db's and convert them into pgsql format, I will host them on the dbsamples page. The dbsamples are _really_ popular! Chris Scott Marlowe wrote: On Fri, 2006-02-17 at 10:51, Ron wrote: I assume we have such? Depends on what you

Re: [HACKERS] postgresql query string length limit

2006-02-19 Thread Michael Fuhr
On Mon, Feb 20, 2006 at 01:28:50PM +1300, Mark Kirkwood wrote: uwcssa wrote: I am using version 8.0.3. i installed using the --without-readline option. Platform and os version would be good too :-), along with the client you are using to elicit this behavior (e.g, psql, Pgadmin

Re: [HACKERS] AC_REPLACE_FUNCS([getaddrinfo]) in 8.1.3

2006-02-19 Thread Martijn van Oosterhout
On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 11:32:53PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: Would you try the patch proposed at http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2006-01/msg00299.php and see if it fixes the problem? That patch has *not* gotten applied, probably because no one confirmed that it worked. This test is

Re: [HACKERS] Pgfoundry and gborg: shut one down

2006-02-19 Thread Jeroen T. Vermeulen
On Mon, February 20, 2006 11:00, Marc G. Fournier wrote: Speaking for libpqxx, my only concern with that is the mailing list. Would those have to move to different addresses--or conversely, would a forced migration make it much easier to move *all* GBorg mailing lists to pgFoundry and