| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jacob Champion <jchampion(at)timescale(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Log details for client certificate failures |
| Date: | 2022-09-13 14:11:47 |
| Message-ID: | 6f9eff5c-ecc6-c0d5-df8e-8df9e2f10534@enterprisedb.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 09.09.22 00:32, Jacob Champion wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 28, 2022 at 9:19 AM Jacob Champion <jchampion(at)timescale(dot)com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 21, 2022 at 4:29 PM Jacob Champion <jchampion(at)timescale(dot)com> wrote:
>>> v4 attempts to fix this by letting the check hooks pass
>>> MCXT_ALLOC_NO_OOM to pg_clean_ascii(). (It's ignored in the frontend,
>>> which just mallocs.)
>>
>> Ping -- should I add an open item somewhere so this isn't lost?
>
> Trying again. Peter, is this approach acceptable? Should I try something else?
This looks fine to me. Committed.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Matthias van de Meent | 2022-09-13 14:13:44 | Re: Tuples inserted and deleted by the same transaction |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2022-09-13 14:09:27 | Re: Avoid redudant initialization and possible memory leak (src/backend/parser/parse_relation.c) |