public inbox for [email protected]help / color / mirror / Atom feed
Re: OpenSSL 3.0.0 vs old branches 4+ messages / 3 participants [nested] [flat]
* Re: OpenSSL 3.0.0 vs old branches @ 2023-02-06 16:13 Tom Lane <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread From: Tom Lane @ 2023-02-06 16:13 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andrew Dunstan <[email protected]>; +Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <[email protected]> Andrew Dunstan <[email protected]> writes: > I recently moved crake to a new machine running Fedora 36, which has > OpenSSL 3.0.0. This causes the SSL tests to fail on branches earlier > than release 13, so I propose to backpatch commit f0d2c65f17 to the > release 11 and 12 branches. Hmm ... according to that commit message, Note that the minimum supported OpenSSL version is 1.0.1 as of 7b283d0e1d1d79bf1c962d790c94d2a53f3bb38a, so this does not introduce any new version requirements. So presumably, changing this test would break it for OpenSSL 0.9.8, which is still nominally supported in those branches. On the other hand, this test isn't run by default, so users would likely never notice anyway. On the whole, +1 for doing this (after the release freeze lifts). regards, tom lane ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: OpenSSL 3.0.0 vs old branches @ 2023-02-06 21:19 Andrew Dunstan <[email protected]> parent: Tom Lane <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread From: Andrew Dunstan @ 2023-02-06 21:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Tom Lane <[email protected]>; +Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <[email protected]> On 2023-02-06 Mo 11:13, Tom Lane wrote: > Andrew Dunstan<[email protected]> writes: >> I recently moved crake to a new machine running Fedora 36, which has >> OpenSSL 3.0.0. This causes the SSL tests to fail on branches earlier >> than release 13, so I propose to backpatch commit f0d2c65f17 to the >> release 11 and 12 branches. > Hmm ... according to that commit message, > > Note that the minimum supported OpenSSL version is 1.0.1 as of > 7b283d0e1d1d79bf1c962d790c94d2a53f3bb38a, so this does not introduce > any new version requirements. > > So presumably, changing this test would break it for OpenSSL 0.9.8, > which is still nominally supported in those branches. On the other > hand, this test isn't run by default, so users would likely never > notice anyway. > > On the whole, +1 for doing this (after the release freeze lifts). > > Presumably we don't have any buildfarm animals running with such old versions of openssl, or they would be failing the same test on release >= 13. I'll push this in due course. cheers andrew -- Andrew Dunstan EDB:https://www.enterprisedb.com ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: OpenSSL 3.0.0 vs old branches @ 2023-02-06 22:01 Tom Lane <[email protected]> parent: Andrew Dunstan <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread From: Tom Lane @ 2023-02-06 22:01 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andrew Dunstan <[email protected]>; +Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <[email protected]> Andrew Dunstan <[email protected]> writes: > On 2023-02-06 Mo 11:13, Tom Lane wrote: >> So presumably, changing this test would break it for OpenSSL 0.9.8, >> which is still nominally supported in those branches. On the other >> hand, this test isn't run by default, so users would likely never >> notice anyway. > Presumably we don't have any buildfarm animals running with such old > versions of openssl, or they would be failing the same test on release > >= 13. That test isn't run by default in the buildfarm either, no? But indeed, probably nobody in the community is testing such builds at all. I did have such setups on my old dinosaur BF animals, but they bit the dust last year for unrelated reasons. I wonder how realistic it is to claim that we still support those old OpenSSL versions. regards, tom lane ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 4+ messages in thread
* [PATCH] Review for wording on tablespaces on partitioned tables @ 2024-03-19 08:49 Alvaro Herrera <[email protected]> 0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread From: Alvaro Herrera @ 2024-03-19 08:49 UTC (permalink / raw) Remove a redundant comment, and document pg_class.relam in catalogs.sgml. After commits a36c84c3e4a9, 87259588d0ab and others. Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/[email protected] --- doc/src/sgml/catalogs.sgml | 8 +++++--- src/backend/commands/tablecmds.c | 4 ---- 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/catalogs.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/catalogs.sgml index 2f091ad09d..183669272b 100644 --- a/doc/src/sgml/catalogs.sgml +++ b/doc/src/sgml/catalogs.sgml @@ -2011,9 +2011,11 @@ SCRAM-SHA-256$<replaceable><iteration count></replaceable>:<replaceable>&l (references <link linkend="catalog-pg-tablespace"><structname>pg_tablespace</structname></link>.<structfield>oid</structfield>) </para> <para> - The tablespace in which this relation is stored. If zero, - the database's default tablespace is implied. (Not meaningful - if the relation has no on-disk file.) + The tablespace in which this relation is stored; for partitioned + tables, the tablespace in which partitions are created + when one is not specified in the creation command. + If zero, the database's default tablespace is implied. + (Not meaningful if the relation has no on-disk file.) </para></entry> </row> diff --git a/src/backend/commands/tablecmds.c b/src/backend/commands/tablecmds.c index 3ed0618b4e..6c0c899210 100644 --- a/src/backend/commands/tablecmds.c +++ b/src/backend/commands/tablecmds.c @@ -807,10 +807,6 @@ DefineRelation(CreateStmt *stmt, char relkind, Oid ownerId, } else if (stmt->partbound) { - /* - * For partitions, when no other tablespace is specified, we default - * the tablespace to the parent partitioned table's. - */ Assert(list_length(inheritOids) == 1); tablespaceId = get_rel_tablespace(linitial_oid(inheritOids)); } -- 2.39.2 --clmzxrgc4yg2hor6-- ^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2024-03-19 08:49 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox mbox.gz follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2023-02-06 16:13 Re: OpenSSL 3.0.0 vs old branches Tom Lane <[email protected]> 2023-02-06 21:19 ` Andrew Dunstan <[email protected]> 2023-02-06 22:01 ` Tom Lane <[email protected]> 2024-03-19 08:49 [PATCH] Review for wording on tablespaces on partitioned tables Alvaro Herrera <[email protected]>
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox