Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > The libpq SSL memory leak reported on -bugs would be good to fix.
> >
> > We don't know yet if that's our bug or not.
> >
> > > BTW, is there a particular reason we're pushing out 7.4.1 so soon?
> > > ISTM t
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> That's no fix --- it will break the code on compilers without long long.
> Here are the emails describing the problem. Seems they should see how
> we do time differences in the backend as an example.
Now that I look at it, the code i
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I am still reading email from yesterday, but this is a new patch in the
> > past 2 days. The problem is that time differences were overflowing int
> > values if the vacuum took a long time, or something like that. The fix
> > is to c
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I am still reading email from yesterday, but this is a new patch in the
> past 2 days. The problem is that time differences were overflowing int
> values if the vacuum took a long time, or something like that. The fix
> is to cast one to long long.
Tha
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > So we have SSL, information schema (bit), and autovacuum. The last one
> > is an easy fix, not sure on the others.
>
> I thought you already applied those autovacuum patches? Is there
> something else pending for it?
I am still rea
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> So we have SSL, information schema (bit), and autovacuum. The last one
> is an easy fix, not sure on the others.
I thought you already applied those autovacuum patches? Is there
something else pending for it?
regards, tom lane
Tom Lane wrote:
> Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > The libpq SSL memory leak reported on -bugs would be good to fix.
>
> We don't know yet if that's our bug or not.
>
> > BTW, is there a particular reason we're pushing out 7.4.1 so soon?
> > ISTM there wouldn't be anything wrong with
Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The libpq SSL memory leak reported on -bugs would be good to fix.
We don't know yet if that's our bug or not.
> BTW, is there a particular reason we're pushing out 7.4.1 so soon?
> ISTM there wouldn't be anything wrong with waiting a week or two...
Well
Neil Conway wrote:
> "Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > To accomodate ppls travel scheduales, we are going to move the 7.4.1
> > release up to Monday, *unless* there is a report before then about
> > something that needs to be fixed first
>
> The libpq SSL memory leak reported on -
"Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> To accomodate ppls travel scheduales, we are going to move the 7.4.1
> release up to Monday, *unless* there is a report before then about
> something that needs to be fixed first
The libpq SSL memory leak reported on -bugs would be good to fix.
BTW
Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >>> A bug in the information schema concerning the bit types must be
> >>> fixed.
> >>
> >> Does anyone have a patch for this?
>
> > I suppose not, but it's being worked on.
>
> What's the bug exactly? Is it worth delaying the rel
Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>> A bug in the information schema concerning the bit types must be
>>> fixed.
>>
>> Does anyone have a patch for this?
> I suppose not, but it's being worked on.
What's the bug exactly? Is it worth delaying the release for? Given
that Bruce is out
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Sat, 6 Dec 2003, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
I suppose not, but it's being worked on.
Is that the one that Joe just mentioned workign on? about BYTEA?
I don't think so.
Joe
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubs
On Sat, 6 Dec 2003, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> > > A bug in the information schema concerning the bit types must be
> > > fixed.
> >
> > Does anyone have a patch for this?
>
> I suppose not, but it's being worked on.
Is that the one that Joe just mentioned workign on? ab
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> > A bug in the information schema concerning the bit types must be
> > fixed.
>
> Does anyone have a patch for this?
I suppose not, but it's being worked on.
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: Have you searched our list archi
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
To accomodate ppls travel scheduales, we are going to move the 7.4.1
release up to Monday, *unless* there is a report before then about
something that needs to be fixed first ... we know of nothing outstanding
right now ...
This means it will be tag'd/bundled on Sunday ...
Marc G. Fournier writes:
> To accomodate ppls travel scheduales, we are going to move the 7.4.1
> release up to Monday, *unless* there is a report before then about
> something that needs to be fixed first ... we know of nothing outstanding
> right now ...
A bug in the information schema concerni
On Fri, 5 Dec 2003, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Marc G. Fournier writes:
>
> > To accomodate ppls travel scheduales, we are going to move the 7.4.1
> > release up to Monday, *unless* there is a report before then about
> > something that needs to be fixed first ... we know of nothing outstanding
> >
--On Friday, December 05, 2003 12:47:40 -0400 "Marc G. Fournier"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
To accomodate ppls travel scheduales, we are going to move the 7.4.1
release up to Monday, *unless* there is a report before then about
something that needs to be fixed first ... we know of nothing outst
To accomodate ppls travel scheduales, we are going to move the 7.4.1
release up to Monday, *unless* there is a report before then about
something that needs to be fixed first ... we know of nothing outstanding
right now ...
This means it will be tag'd/bundled on Sunday ...
Marc G. Fournie
20 matches
Mail list logo
