Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I suspected we'd forgotten something.
> The attached small patch appears to be what's required (at least on
> loris). "make check" failed but not for any apparent ipv6 reason. More
> importantly, we correctly set HAVE_IPV6 and HAVE_STRUCT_ADDRINFO.
"Chuck McDevitt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It turns out the root of the bug is that our definition of "addrinfo"
> and Windows definition of "addrinfo" are not the same.
... which answers your question about why it's important to pull in
Microsoft's header. That should ensure that the code us
The "No error" message occurs because pqcomm.c assumes bind returns the
error code in "errno", but on Windows it gets returned by
"WSAGetLastError()".This bug probably exists in many places in the
code.
The actual error should have said:
LOG: could not bind IPv6 socket: The system detected a
I don't understand this proposed patch. Pulling in more headers, when
they aren't needed, shouldn't change the behavior of the code...
What am I missing?
> -Original Message-
> From: Andrew Dunstan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2005 4:03 PM
> To: Tom Lane
> Cc: P
Tom Lane wrote:
Petr Jelinek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Yep those changes proposed in my previous email fixes IPv4 too.
Apparently not on loris (unless there was another patch that I missed).
Maybe something to do with a different version of Windows?
On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 18:44:13 -0400,
Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Bruno Wolff III <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >> We already have MD5 encryption in the server. Why would someone want
> >> CRC32?
>
> > Lower CPU utiliization.
>
> Like Bruce, I don't real
Bruno Wolff III <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> We already have MD5 encryption in the server. Why would someone want
>> CRC32?
> Lower CPU utiliization.
Like Bruce, I don't really think there is demand for such a function.
But if we were going to offer it, it at least ou
Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 16:14:04 -0400,
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Ilia Kantor wrote:
> > > Both backend and users may have a nice use of the function.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Nice and fast hashing when one doesn't need encryption.
> >
> > We already have MD5 encryp
Petr Jelinek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Yep those changes proposed in my previous email fixes IPv4 too.
Apparently not on loris (unless there was another patch that I missed).
Maybe something to do with a different version of Windows?
regards, tom lane
Tom Lane wrote:
Possibly, but that's apparently not the only problem. I'm looking at
the first buildfarm result with this patch,
http://www.pgbuildfarm.org/cgi-bin/show_log.pl?nm=loris&dt=2005-08-25%2018:56:02
The interesting part is the postmaster log at the bottom:
LOG: could not bind IPv4
Petr Jelinek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>> So, not quite there yet.
> [I did make check only in W2K because I don't have direct access to XP
> machine now]
> No thats not windows error thats postgres error (look at pqcomm.c),
> which means HAVE_IPV6 is not defined.
Possib
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
I thought this had been tested. I should have tested it myself. Apologies.
Right, I thought I tested it, well maybe it was my version dunno but
surely it was my mistake.
Anyway, with Petr's extra patch I get a clean build, but "make check"
fails with a postmaster bind f
On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 16:14:04 -0400,
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Ilia Kantor wrote:
> > Both backend and users may have a nice use of the function.
> >
> >
> >
> > Nice and fast hashing when one doesn't need encryption.
>
> We already have MD5 encryption in the server. Why would someone want
Ilia Kantor wrote:
> Both backend and users may have a nice use of the function.
>
>
>
> Nice and fast hashing when one doesn't need encryption.
We already have MD5 encryption in the server. Why would someone want
CRC32?
--
Bruce Momjian| http://candle.pha.pa.us
Petr Jelinek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Dave Page wrote:
>> It, or some related patch appears to have broken the build on buildfarm
>> member snake.
> Atached patch fixes it and also adds proper gai_strerror for windows.
Applied. I had to #ifdef the gai_strerror additions to avoid breakage
o
Petr Jelinek wrote:
Dave Page wrote:
It, or some related patch appears to have broken the build on
buildfarm member snake.
I haven't had time to investigate.
/D
Atached patch fixes it and also adds proper gai_strerror for windows.
(It's patch against CVS *after* Chucks patch was aplie
Both backend and users may have a nice use of the
function.
Nice and fast hashing when one doesn’t need encryption.
crc32.c
Description: Binary data
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
Dave Page wrote:
It, or some related patch appears to have broken the build on buildfarm member
snake.
I haven't had time to investigate.
/D
Atached patch fixes it and also adds proper gai_strerror for windows.
(It's patch against CVS *after* Chucks patch was aplied)
--
Regards
Petr Jeline
It, or some related patch appears to have broken the build on buildfarm member
snake.
I haven't had time to investigate.
/D
-Original Message-
From: "Bruce Momjian"
Sent: 25/08/05 01:14:54
To: "Tom Lane"<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Andrew Dunstan"<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Chuck McDevitt"<[EMA
19 matches
Mail list logo
