On Fri, Oct 6, 2017 at 5:07 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Dave Page writes:
> > On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 4:21 PM, Andrew Dunstan
> wrote:
> >> On 10/24/2016 08:56 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> >>> I'd prefer the solution of disabling --with-openssl. If you just nuke
> >>> those members, we never will find out
Dave Page writes:
> On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 4:21 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>> On 10/24/2016 08:56 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> I'd prefer the solution of disabling --with-openssl. If you just nuke
>>> those members, we never will find out whether the recent postgres_fdw
>>> changes pass on them. Bes
On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 10:22 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>
> On 10/25/2016 10:26 AM, Dave Page wrote:
>>
>>
>> OK, I think I got the perl stuff right - running test builds now.
>>
>
>
> Ping me if you need help.
Thanks - looks like I got it though, they're all green again :-)
--
Dave Page
Post
On 10/25/2016 10:26 AM, Dave Page wrote:
OK, I think I got the perl stuff right - running test builds now.
Ping me if you need help.
cheers
andrew
--
Sent via pgsql-committers mailing list (pgsql-committers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org
On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 4:21 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
>
> On 10/24/2016 08:56 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>
>> Dave Page writes:
>>>
>>> On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 12:30 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
>>> wrote:
I'm ok with removing them from the buildfarm, if you feel that way.
>>>
>>> Andrew, Tom -
On 10/24/2016 08:56 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
Dave Page writes:
On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 12:30 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
I'm ok with removing them from the buildfarm, if you feel that way.
Andrew, Tom - any thoughts on removing them (just from head and future
branches)?
I'd prefer the soluti
Dave Page writes:
> On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 12:30 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>> I'm ok with removing them from the buildfarm, if you feel that way.
> Andrew, Tom - any thoughts on removing them (just from head and future
> branches)?
I'd prefer the solution of disabling --with-openssl. If y
On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 12:30 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>
>
> On 24 October 2016 12:33:49 EEST, Dave Page wrote:
>>Hi
>>
>>On Sun, Oct 23, 2016 at 8:22 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
>>wrote:
>>> Any chance you could update the OpenSSL versions on those systems, or
>>> failing that, remove --with-op
On 24 October 2016 12:33:49 EEST, Dave Page wrote:
>Hi
>
>On Sun, Oct 23, 2016 at 8:22 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
>wrote:
>> Any chance you could update the OpenSSL versions on those systems, or
>> failing that, remove --with-openssl?
>
>Well I could. But really, how useful is that given that it's
Hi
On Sun, Oct 23, 2016 at 8:22 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> On 10/22/2016 07:11 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>
>> I wrote:
>>>
>>> The only other Windows machines in the buildfarm that are building
>>> with openssl are Andrew's bowerbird and frogmouth; they're both passing.
>>> I wonder what openssl
On 10/22/2016 07:11 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
I wrote:
The only other Windows machines in the buildfarm that are building
with openssl are Andrew's bowerbird and frogmouth; they're both passing.
I wonder what openssl version is on those.
What's the plan for getting the buildfarm back to green in the
On 10/22/2016 12:11 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
I wrote:
The only other Windows machines in the buildfarm that are building
with openssl are Andrew's bowerbird and frogmouth; they're both passing.
I wonder what openssl version is on those.
What's the plan for getting the buildfarm back to green in th
I wrote:
> The only other Windows machines in the buildfarm that are building
> with openssl are Andrew's bowerbird and frogmouth; they're both passing.
> I wonder what openssl version is on those.
What's the plan for getting the buildfarm back to green in the wake
of this patch? If there isn't o
Dave Page writes:
> On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 9:10 AM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>> Dave, what version of OpenSSL are 'narwhal' and 'baiji' using? I've tried to
>> reproduce this on my laptop, by compiling different versions of OpenSSL,
>> between 0.9.8beta1 and 0.9.8 head, but without success..
>
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 2:34 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> On 10/18/2016 04:32 PM, Dave Page wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 1:41 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>>
>>> Dave Page writes:
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 12:18 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
wrote:
>
> On 18 October 2016 12:52:
Dave Page writes:
> On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 1:41 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Is it possible that there's a header-vs-executable version mismatch
>> contributing to the problem here? (Although you'd think we'd have
>> hit it before now, if so.)
> We're not actually calling the openssl binary are we?
On 10/18/2016 04:32 PM, Dave Page wrote:
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 1:41 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Dave Page writes:
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 12:18 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
On 18 October 2016 12:52:14 EEST, Dave Page wrote:
Baiji: 0.9.8e
Narwhal: 0.9.6b
Hang on, I removed support for OpenSS
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 1:41 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Dave Page writes:
>> On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 12:18 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>>> On 18 October 2016 12:52:14 EEST, Dave Page wrote:
Baiji: 0.9.8e
Narwhal: 0.9.6b
>
>>> Hang on, I removed support for OpenSSL < 0.9.8 a while ago. Na
Dave Page writes:
> On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 12:18 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>> On 18 October 2016 12:52:14 EEST, Dave Page wrote:
>>> Baiji: 0.9.8e
>>> Narwhal: 0.9.6b
>> Hang on, I removed support for OpenSSL < 0.9.8 a while ago. Narwhal
>> shouldn't even compile with 0.9.6.
> Oops, sorr
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 12:18 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>
>
> On 18 October 2016 12:52:14 EEST, Dave Page wrote:
>>On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 9:10 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
>>wrote:
>>> On 10/18/2016 12:28 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
Heikki Linnakangas writes:
>
> Use OpenSSL EVP API fo
On 18 October 2016 12:52:14 EEST, Dave Page wrote:
>On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 9:10 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
>wrote:
>> On 10/18/2016 12:28 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>>
>>> Heikki Linnakangas writes:
Use OpenSSL EVP API for symmetric encryption in pgcrypto.
>>>
>>>
>>> BTW, "narwhal" seems to
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 9:10 AM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> On 10/18/2016 12:28 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>
>> Heikki Linnakangas writes:
>>>
>>> Use OpenSSL EVP API for symmetric encryption in pgcrypto.
>>
>>
>> BTW, "narwhal" seems to have a problem with this.
>> Not very clear what, maybe an incom
On 10/18/2016 12:28 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
Heikki Linnakangas writes:
Use OpenSSL EVP API for symmetric encryption in pgcrypto.
BTW, "narwhal" seems to have a problem with this.
Not very clear what, maybe an incompatibility with old openssl versions?
Dave, what version of OpenSSL are 'narwhal'
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 6:28 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Heikki Linnakangas writes:
>> Use OpenSSL EVP API for symmetric encryption in pgcrypto.
>
> BTW, "narwhal" seems to have a problem with this.
> Not very clear what, maybe an incompatibility with old openssl versions?
Details are here:
http://bui
Heikki Linnakangas writes:
> Use OpenSSL EVP API for symmetric encryption in pgcrypto.
BTW, "narwhal" seems to have a problem with this.
Not very clear what, maybe an incompatibility with old openssl versions?
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-committers mailing list
Use OpenSSL EVP API for symmetric encryption in pgcrypto.
The old "low-level" API is deprecated, and doesn't support hardware
acceleration. And this makes the code simpler, too.
Discussion: <561274f1.1030...@iki.fi>
Branch
--
master
Details
---
http://git.postgresql.org/pg/commitdiff/5f
26 matches
Mail list logo
