| From: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Chris Campbell <chris_campbell(at)mac(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Recent vendor SSL renegotiation patches break PostgreSQL |
| Date: | 2010-02-25 13:27:21 |
| Message-ID: | 9837222c1002250527g70ab0255w953263670b01d4b5@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 10:42, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 17:47, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> writes:
>> Fair enough, USERSET it is then.
>
> Done. Will run some tests and then apply.
And applied.
I backpatched it to 8.2, which is as far as it applied fairly cleanly.
Before that, we don't have GUC_UNIT_KB for example, so it'll be a
different format of the patch as well. I'm not sure it's important
enough to go back beyond that...
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Greg Stark | 2010-02-25 13:41:59 | Re: Assertion failure in walreceiver |
| Previous Message | Boszormenyi Zoltan | 2010-02-25 12:26:34 | Re: NaN/Inf fix for ECPG |