On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 12:32 AM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
Applied, thanks!
Thanks. Now, for Windows...
--
Michael
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
On Sun, Apr 12, 2015 at 8:38 PM, Heikki Linnakangas hlinn...@iki.fi wrote:
Care to name some? This is certainly quite cumbersome to exploit, but it's
doable.
We've talked a lot about covert channels and timing attacks on RLS, but this
makes me more worried because you can attack passwords
On 2015/04/13 23:25, Jim Nasby wrote:
On 4/13/15 4:58 AM, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
On 2015/04/10 21:40, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
On 2015/04/09 12:07, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
I'll update the patch, which will contain only an infrastructure for
this in the PG core, and will not contain any postgres_fdw
Robert,
* Stephen Frost (sfr...@snowman.net) wrote:
* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 12:53 AM, Stephen Frost sfr...@snowman.net wrote:
Clearly, further testing and documentation is required and I'll be
getting to that over the next couple of days, but
Hanada-san,
Thanks for further review, but I found two bugs in v10 patch.
I’ve fixed them and wrapped up v11 patch here.
* Fix bug about illegal column order
Scan against a base relation returns columns in order of column definition,
but
its target list might require different order.
On 2015/04/10 21:40, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
On 2015/04/09 12:07, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
I'll update the patch, which will contain only an infrastructure for
this in the PG core, and will not contain any postgres_fdw change.
I updated the patch based on your comments. Updated patch attached. In
On 4/13/15 4:58 AM, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
On 2015/04/10 21:40, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
On 2015/04/09 12:07, Etsuro Fujita wrote:
I'll update the patch, which will contain only an infrastructure for
this in the PG core, and will not contain any postgres_fdw change.
I updated the patch based on
David G. Johnston wrote:
Can we create a fake CF time period into which all of these waiting on
author entries can be placed and readily browsed/found instead of leaving
them in whatever CF they happened to stall in?
This seems a good idea to me -- not a fake CF, but a page listing all
the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 11/04/15 05:30 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Ian Stakenvicius a...@gentoo.org writes:
Hey all -- so I know that Gentoo Linux is likely the only
platform this bug occurs under, but i got annoyed enough with it
that I decided to write a patch to fix this
* Heikki Linnakangas (hlinn...@iki.fi) wrote:
On 04/10/2015 05:17 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
On Apr 9, 2015, at 8:51 PM, Heikki Linnakangas hlinn...@iki.fi wrote:
What should we do about this?
I bet that there are at least 1000 covert channel attacks that are more
practically exploitable than
On 03/26/2015 09:45 PM, Arthur Silva wrote:
On Mar 26, 2015 4:20 AM, Vladimir Borodin r...@simply.name wrote:
26 марта 2015 г., в 7:32, Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com
написал(а):
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 12:23 PM, Venkata Balaji N nag1...@gmail.com
wrote:
If the master is
On 04/01/2015 07:12 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 10:26:34PM +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
On 12/19/2014 02:55 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
I'm thinking that we should add a step to promotion, where we scan
pg_xlog for any segments higher than the timeline switch point,
On 04/10/2015 04:01 PM, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Do these tests work in VPATH builds? I now get a failure in make
check-world (both with and without Michael's patch). make check in
src/bin/pg_rewind dies with the output below. If I change ./pg_rewind
to pg_rewind, tests pass, but I wonder if the
On 04/02/2015 04:56 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 4:37 PM, Michael Paquier michael.paqu...@gmail.com
wrote:
While looking at that I noticed two additional issues:
- In remote mode, the connection string to the promoted standby was
incorrect when running pg_rewind, leading
14 matches
Mail list logo
