[HACKERS] Re: Command Prompt 8.4.4 PRMs compiled with debug/assert enabled

2010-06-14 Thread Bruce Momjian
Bruce Momjian wrote: Bruce Momjian wrote: Bruce Momjian wrote: Alvaro Herrera wrote: Excerpts from Tom Lane's message of jue jun 10 11:46:25 -0400 2010: Yes, the folks at commandprompt need to be told about this. Loudly. It's a serious packaging error. Just

Re: [HACKERS] Re: Command Prompt 8.4.4 PRMs compiled with debug/assert enabled

2010-06-14 Thread Lacey Powers
Bruce Momjian wrote: Bruce Momjian wrote: Bruce Momjian wrote: Bruce Momjian wrote: Alvaro Herrera wrote: Excerpts from Tom Lane's message of jue jun 10 11:46:25 -0400 2010: Yes, the folks at commandprompt need to be told about this. Loudly. It's a serious packaging error. Just notified

Re: [HACKERS] Re: Command Prompt 8.4.4 PRMs compiled with debug/assert enabled

2010-06-14 Thread Bruce Momjian
Lacey Powers wrote: I tried to send something out Thursday about this to pgsql-performance, and I tried to send something out last night about this to pgsql-announce. Neither seem to have gotten through, or approved. =( =( =( Yes, I suspected that might have happened. Thursday to the

Re: [HACKERS] Re: Command Prompt 8.4.4 PRMs compiled with debug/assert enabled

2010-06-14 Thread Tom Lane
Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us writes: OK, how do we properly get rid of all those buggy 8.4.4 installs? Seems a posting to announce is not enough, and we need to show users how to tell if they are running a de-buggy version. The original thread already covered that in sufficient detail:

Re: [HACKERS] Re: Command Prompt 8.4.4 PRMs compiled with debug/assert enabled

2010-06-14 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us writes: OK, how do we properly get rid of all those buggy 8.4.4 installs? Seems a posting to announce is not enough, and we need to show users how to tell if they are running a de-buggy version. The original thread already covered that in

Re: [HACKERS] Re: Command Prompt 8.4.4 PRMs compiled with debug/assert enabled

2010-06-14 Thread Lacey Powers
Bruce Momjian wrote: Lacey Powers wrote: I tried to send something out Thursday about this to pgsql-performance, and I tried to send something out last night about this to pgsql-announce. Neither seem to have gotten through, or approved. =( =( =( Yes, I suspected that might have happened.

Re: [HACKERS] Re: Command Prompt 8.4.4 PRMs compiled with debug/assert enabled

2010-06-14 Thread Josh Berkus
On 6/14/10 3:39 PM, Lacey Powers wrote: Bruce Momjian wrote: Lacey Powers wrote: I tried to send something out Thursday about this to pgsql-performance, and I tried to send something out last night about this to pgsql-announce. Neither seem to have gotten through, or approved. =( =( =(

Re: [HACKERS] Re: Command Prompt 8.4.4 PRMs compiled with debug/assert enabled

2010-06-14 Thread Andrew Dunstan
Lacey Powers wrote: Do any of the other minor releases made at the same time have this problem, or just 8.4.4? The only ones affected were 8.4.4 for CentOS 5 x86_64 and i386. That also covers RHEL5 x86_64/i386, no? I assume you use the same RPMs for both. cheers andrew -- Sent via

Re: [HACKERS] Re: Command Prompt 8.4.4 PRMs compiled with debug/assert enabled

2010-06-14 Thread Lacey Powers
Andrew Dunstan wrote: Lacey Powers wrote: Do any of the other minor releases made at the same time have this problem, or just 8.4.4? The only ones affected were 8.4.4 for CentOS 5 x86_64 and i386. That also covers RHEL5 x86_64/i386, no? I assume you use the same RPMs for both.

Re: [HACKERS] Re: Command Prompt 8.4.4 PRMs compiled with debug/assert enabled

2010-06-14 Thread Lacey Powers
Josh Berkus wrote: On 6/14/10 3:39 PM, Lacey Powers wrote: Bruce Momjian wrote: Lacey Powers wrote: I tried to send something out Thursday about this to pgsql-performance, and I tried to send something out last night about this to pgsql-announce. Neither seem to have gotten through, or