On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 5:44 AM, MauMau wrote:
> From: "Magnus Hagander"
>
> Does somebody want to look at backpatching this to 9.1 and earlier, or
>> should we just say that it's not fully supported on those Windows versions
>> unless you apply the registry workaround?
>>
>
> Please use the at
From: "Magnus Hagander"
Does somebody want to look at backpatching this to 9.1 and earlier, or
should we just say that it's not fully supported on those Windows versions
unless you apply the registry workaround?
Please use the attached patch. It applies cleanly to both 9.1 and 9.0.
We don't
From: "Magnus Hagander"
Unfortunately we missed the releases that have just been wrapped.
It's really unfortunate... I hope the next minor release will be soon.
I've applied this and backpatched to 9.3 and 9.2, which is as far back as
it goes cleanly.
Thank you.
In 9.1 the build system
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 3:28 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Magnus Hagander writes:
> > I've applied this and backpatched to 9.3 and 9.2, which is as far back as
> > it goes cleanly.
>
> > In 9.1 the build system looked significantly different, which makes it
> > strange since the original report in this
Magnus Hagander writes:
> I've applied this and backpatched to 9.3 and 9.2, which is as far back as
> it goes cleanly.
> In 9.1 the build system looked significantly different, which makes it
> strange since the original report in this thread was about 9.1 but the
> patch supplied clearly wasn't
On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 12:57 PM, Craig Ringer wrote:
> On 02/04/2014 07:28 PM, MauMau wrote:
> >>
> >
> > Please don't mind, I didn't misunderstand your intent. I think we
> > should apply this in the next minor release to avoid unnecessary
> > confusion -- more new users would use PostgreSQL on
On 02/04/2014 07:28 PM, MauMau wrote:
>>
>
> Please don't mind, I didn't misunderstand your intent. I think we
> should apply this in the next minor release to avoid unnecessary
> confusion -- more new users would use PostgreSQL on Windows 8/2012 and
> hit this problem.
>
> I added this patch to
From: "Craig Ringer"
I completely agree; just saying that any installer can set the key.
I'm convinced that setting this flag is appropriate, at least while Pg
relies on having the shared memory segment mapped in the same zone in
every executable. Just pointing out that there's a workaround in
On 02/01/2014 09:53 PM, MauMau wrote:
>
> Not all users use PostgreSQL built by EnterpriseDB, so I think
> src\tools\msvc\build.bat should produce modules that are not affected by
> ASLR.
I completely agree; just saying that any installer can set the key.
I'm convinced that setting this flag is
From: "Craig Ringer"
I'm reasonably persuaded that there's a need for this, though IFEO (see
below) can be used at or after install-time as a workaround.
I see. And I also found it effective as another workaround to set the below
registry key. This disables ASLR for all executables, so it w
On 01/30/2014 08:14 PM, MauMau wrote:
>> Does this issue also occur on 9.3.2, or in 9.4 HEAD, when tested on
>> Win2k12?
>
> I'm sure it should. The release note doesn't have any reference to this
> issue. Another user who reported this issue in pgsql-general
> experienced this with 9.2.4.
> In
I'm sorry for the late reply. I was unable to access email.
From: "Craig Ringer"
On 01/24/2014 06:42 PM, MauMau wrote:
The customer is using 64-bit PostgreSQL 9.1.x
Which "x"?
9.1.6.
Does this issue also occur on 9.3.2, or in 9.4 HEAD, when tested on
Win2k12?
I'm sure it should. The
On 01/24/2014 06:42 PM, MauMau wrote:
> Hello,
>
> My customer reported the following problem on Windows. I'm afraid this
> is a serious problem, and I think we should provide a fix in the next
> minor release. I've attached a fix, and I would wish it to be back-ported.
>
>
> [Problem]
> The c
13 matches
Mail list logo
