Charles Duffy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
We came up with this patch in response to a problem reported to us by a
client. They had a query which took an unacceptably long time to respond
to a cancel request (SIGINT). The client uses 8.1.4, so the patch is
against that.
How long is that
Marc G. Fournier [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
'k, isn't the Reply-To header part of an RFC somewhere? Or is it really an
optional thing for an MUA to follow?
The relevant RFC would be 2822.
If mailers have started ignoring reply-to it would be *because* of lists that
set it. In the presence of
Am Dienstag, 11. Juli 2006 23:01 schrieb Alvaro Herrera:
One exception is that we can't do that with full vacuums. The reason is
that full vacuum may want to run user-defined functions to be able to
index the tuples it moves. This isn't a problem normally, except in the
case where the
Neil Conway wrote:
On Tue, 2006-07-11 at 15:57 -0400, Marko Kreen wrote:
Few cleanups and couple of new things:
- add SHA2 algorithm to older OpenSSL
- add BIGNUM math to have public-key cryptography workon
non-OpenSSL build.
- gen_random_bytes() function
I'll apply this
On Tuesday 11 July 2006 21:19, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
'k, isn't the Reply-To header part of an RFC somewhere? Or is it really
an optional thing for an MUA to follow?
Well I didn't even seen the reply-to in the email when it came across. So that
may be one problem. But just as a note I found
This is a revised patch originated by Junji TERAMOTO for HEAD.
[BTree vacuum before page splitting]
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2006-01/msg00301.php
I think we can resurrect his idea because we will scan btree pages
at-atime now; the missing-restarting-point problem went
On Tue, 2006-07-11 at 15:57 -0400, Marko Kreen wrote:
Few cleanups and couple of new things [...]
Applied, thanks for the patch.
BTW, the following text from README.pgcrypto is no longer accurate,
right? (circa line 42 in HEAD)
Without OpenSSL, public-key encryption does not work, as pgcrypto
Neil Conway [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, 2006-07-11 at 15:57 -0400, Marko Kreen wrote:
Few cleanups and couple of new things [...]
Applied, thanks for the patch.
This has broken two out of the four buildfarm members that reported
in the last half hour :-( I think kudu does not like //
On Thu, 2006-07-13 at 00:50 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
This has broken two out of the four buildfarm members that reported
in the last half hour :-( I think kudu does not like // comments,
not sure what kookaburra is on about.
BTW, you've switched your animal names :) I fixed the C++-style
