public inbox for [email protected]  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed

From: Alexander Law <[email protected]>
To: Peter Eisentraut <[email protected]>
To: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Some minor error fixes
Date: Sat, 14 May 2016 09:23:02 +0300
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:[email protected]?body=unsub%20pgsql-docs>

Hello Peter,

Thank you!
I see that M is just an alias for MUMPS. I stumbled upon the 
inconsistency between B015, B115, B125, M022 on the one side and M015 on 
the other. Anyway, it's definitely not a bug in our docs.

Please look at the following errors/fixes.

Patch #2 is for consistency on [1].
Bug #6 is the most interesting. Table "Table F-17. Hash Algorithm 
Speeds" on [2] contains following row:
/Algorithm | Hashes/sec//
//crypt-bf/5 | 13504/
And there is a following note below the table:
/For reference: john -test shows 213 loops/sec for crypt-bf/5. (The very 
small difference in results is in accordance with the fact that the 
crypt-bf implementation in pgcrypto is the same one used in John the 
Ripper.)/
It seems that the number 213 is out of sync with the table contents. 
("Very small difference" was indeed present before [3]. See [4].)
As I can't reproduce exact numbers on my machine, I suggest to slightly 
increase the number that was specified in the table (+2 as before).

[1] http://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/reference-server.html
[2] 
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/pgcrypto.html#PGCRYPTO-HASH-SPEED-TABLE
[3] 
https://github.com/postgres/postgres/commit/d6464fdc0a591662e5e5ee1b0303932e89cb027c
[4] 
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.1/static/pgcrypto.html#PGCRYPTO-HASH-SPEED-TABLE

Best regards,
Alexander


14.05.2016 04:41, Peter Eisentraut пишет:
> On 5/4/16 3:04 PM, Alexander Law wrote:
>> Thank you!
>> I have some more errors written down, maybe they are worth fixing too.
>>
>> Second patch is for consistency in [1].
>> (I think XMLValidate could be aligned with "IS VALID predicate")
>> Third patch is for language name teared down in [1].
>> It seems that root of this typo is as far as in SQL Standard (see M015
>> description in [2]), but IMO it should be fixed anyway.
>
> I have fixed #1 and #2 but left #3 as it is in the SQL standard. (I 
> think M and MUMPS are the same thing.)
>

view thread (11+ messages)  latest in thread

reply

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: [email protected]
  Cc: [email protected], [email protected]
  Subject: Re: Some minor error fixes
  In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox