On Mon, 2013-08-12 at 10:49 -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > Alternatively, if we want to just print an error message and
> proceed, we
> > should put the strerror based on the return value into the message.
>
> That could certainly be added.
Here is a patch for that. I also adjusted the message
* Peter Eisentraut (pete...@gmx.net) wrote:
> On 8/1/13 1:42 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > * Alvaro Herrera (alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote:
> >> pgsecure_open_client() returns -1 if it can't lock the mutex. This is a
> >> problem because the callers are not prepared for that return value. I
> >>
On 8/1/13 1:42 PM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Alvaro Herrera (alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote:
>> pgsecure_open_client() returns -1 if it can't lock the mutex. This is a
>> problem because the callers are not prepared for that return value. I
>> think it should return PGRES_POLLING_FAILED instead,
* Alvaro Herrera (alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote:
> pgsecure_open_client() returns -1 if it can't lock the mutex. This is a
> problem because the callers are not prepared for that return value. I
> think it should return PGRES_POLLING_FAILED instead, after setting an
> appropriate error message
Stephen Frost wrote:
> All,
>
> I wanted to highlight the below commit as being a significant enough
> change that it warrents being seen on -hackers and not just
> -committers. If you use SSL with libpq, particularly in a threaded
> mode/environment, please take a look/test this change.
All,
I wanted to highlight the below commit as being a significant enough
change that it warrents being seen on -hackers and not just
-committers. If you use SSL with libpq, particularly in a threaded
mode/environment, please take a look/test this change. Prior to the
patch, we would c
