On Nov 21, 2011 8:29 AM, Diego Elio Pettenò flamee...@flameeyes.eu
wrote:
The following bug has been logged online:
Bug reference: 6302
Logged by: Diego Elio Pettenò
Email address: flamee...@flameeyes.eu
PostgreSQL version: 9.1.1
Operating system: Gentoo Linux
The following bug has been logged online:
Bug reference: 6303
Logged by: Alessandro Bellanda
Email address: a.bella...@gmail.com
PostgreSQL version: 9.1.1
Operating system: Linux CentOS release 5.5 64 bit
Description:ROW_NUMBER()
Details:
Case:
ROW_NUMBER() OVER
On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 8:40 AM, Alessandro Bellanda
a.bella...@gmail.com wrote:
The following bug has been logged online:
Bug reference: 6303
Logged by: Alessandro Bellanda
Email address: a.bella...@gmail.com
PostgreSQL version: 9.1.1
Operating system: Linux CentOS
On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 18:43, Diego Elio Pettenò
flamee...@flameeyes.eu wrote:
Il giorno lun, 21/11/2011 alle 09.08 +0100, Magnus Hagander ha scritto:
What actual error do you get?
ENOTDIR, sorry but I don't really want to break my system again just to
show the strerror output ;)
So a
Il giorno lun, 21/11/2011 alle 09.08 +0100, Magnus Hagander ha scritto:
What actual error do you get?
ENOTDIR, sorry but I don't really want to break my system again just to
show the strerror output ;)
Its still impossible to use it securely, but I agree we shouldn't just
error out in a
Il giorno lun, 21/11/2011 alle 18.59 +0100, Magnus Hagander ha scritto:
So a simple extension of the check to be for both ENOENT and ENOTDIR
would work, right?
In this case, yes...
Without validating the server certificate, however, it's kind of hard
to actually call it secure.
As you said,
