From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: SSL cipher and version |
Date: | 2010-07-27 23:43:51 |
Message-ID: | AANLkTikXJM0Eoky8Dq5ZvjcM-=RcsSOQkZ5Shb88bcRr@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 12:06 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 9:57 AM, Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 2:49 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>>> Any objections to me committing this?
>>>
>>> Might wanna fix this first:
>>>
>>> +PG_FUNCTION_INFO_V1(ssl_veresion);
>>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>> Wow. It works remarkably well without fixing that, but I'll admit
>> that does seem lucky.
>
> Well, it's got no arguments, which is the main thing that works
> differently in call protocol V1. I think you'd find that the
> PG_RETURN_NULL case doesn't really work though ...
It seems to work, but it might be that something's broken under the hood.
Anyhow, committed with that correction.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise Postgres Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2010-07-27 23:47:20 | Re: Parsing of aggregate ORDER BY clauses |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2010-07-27 23:41:29 | Re: Review: Re: [PATCH] Re: [HACKERS] Adding xpath_exists function |