| From: | Jaime Casanova <jcasanov(at)systemguards(dot)com(dot)ec> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Not quite a security hole in internal_in |
| Date: | 2009-06-09 16:45:54 |
| Message-ID: | 3073cc9b0906090945l776786a0lb4108e3c8edc93d5@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 11:31 AM, Tom Lane<tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
> Normally we would consider a pg_proc change as requiring a catversion
> bump. Since we are already past 8.4 beta we couldn't do that without
> forcing an initdb for beta testers. What I'd like to do about this
> is change the proisstrict settings in pg_proc.h but not bump catversion.
> This will ensure the fix is in place and protecting future coding,
> although possibly not getting enforced in 8.4 production instances that
> were upgraded from beta (if there are any such).
>
why not bump it just at the final release. i don't think beta testers
are on production so they still have to initdb production servers
anyway
--
Atentamente,
Jaime Casanova
Soporte y capacitación de PostgreSQL
Asesoría y desarrollo de sistemas
Guayaquil - Ecuador
Cel. +59387171157
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2009-06-09 16:55:41 | Re: Not quite a security hole in internal_in |
| Previous Message | Greg Stark | 2009-06-09 16:42:52 | Re: Multicolumn index corruption on 8.4 beta 2 |