From: | PG Bug reporting form <noreply(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Cc: | chriswvandevelde(at)gmail(dot)com |
Subject: | BUG #18378: postgis protobuf support inconsistent |
Date: | 2024-03-05 06:58:59 |
Message-ID: | 18378-e6313f7b07dee877@postgresql.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
The following bug has been logged on the website:
Bug reference: 18378
Logged by: Chris Van de Velde
Email address: chriswvandevelde(at)gmail(dot)com
PostgreSQL version: 13.14
Operating system: Centos7/Rocky8
Description:
We build various postgresql distros that include postgis as sourced from
https://download.postgresql.org/pub/repos/yum/13/redhat and have noticed
inconsistent configuration for protobuf support in postgis across
architectures and even within architectures/OS versions. Is it possible to
at least get the most recent releases for Redhat 7 (3.3 for amd64 & 3.2 for
arm) rebuilt with protobuf support enabled (see
https://postgis.net/docs/postgis_installation.html#installation_configuration
for requirements). Alternatively, could the current release (3.4) for RH7
amd64 + arm be built with protobuffer support enabled?
postgisVersion.Rh7.amd64=33 -> does not include protobuf
postgisVersion.Rh7.amd64=32 -> does not include protobuf
postgisVersion.Rh7.amd64=31 -> does not include protobuf
postgisVersion.Rh7.amd64=30 -> *does* include protobuf
postgisVersion.Rh8.amd64=34 -> *does* include protobuf
postgisVersion.Rh8.amd64=33 -> *does* include protobuf
postgisVersion.Rh8.amd64=31 -> *does* include protobuf
postgisVersion.Rh8.arm64=34 -> *does* include protobuf
postgisVersion.Rh7.arm64=32 -> does not include protobuf
postgisVersion.Rh7.arm64=31 -> does not include protobuf
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | alvherre | 2024-03-05 07:37:27 | Re: BUG #18371: There are wrong constraint residues when detach hash partiton concurrently |
Previous Message | Tender Wang | 2024-03-05 06:21:49 | Re: BUG #18314: PARALLEL UNSAFE function does not prevent parallel index build |