I'm getting JDBC exceptions when I try to connect to 9.1 (master) with
the postgresql-9.0-801.jdbc3.jar I don't have this issue with 9.0.
There is nothing obvious at http://jdbc.postgresql.org or in the 9.1
alpha release notes that indicate a newer JDBC driver will be required.
Have other people seen similar issues?
If 9.1 does require a JDBC driver upgrade then it would be good if an
updated driver was posted before we start encouraging people to test
their applications with the beta.
Caused by: org.postgresql.util.PSQLException: Protocol error. Session
setup failed.
at
org.postgresql.core.v3.ConnectionFactoryImpl.readStartupMessages(ConnectionFactoryImpl.java:496)
at
org.postgresql.core.v3.ConnectionFactoryImpl.openConnectionImpl(ConnectionFactoryImpl.java:112)
at
org.postgresql.core.ConnectionFactory.openConnection(ConnectionFactory.java:66)
at
org.postgresql.jdbc2.AbstractJdbc2Connection.(AbstractJdbc3Connection.java:30)
at org.postgresql.jdbc3.Jdbc3Connection.(Driver.java:393)
at org.postgresql.Driver.connect(Driver.java:267)
at java.sql.DriverManager.getConnection(DriverManager.java:620)
at java.sql.DriverManager.getConnection(DriverManager.java:200)
at sun.reflect.GeneratedMethodAccessor5.invoke(Unknown Source)
at
sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43)
at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:616)
at org.mozilla.javascript.MemberBox.invoke(MemberBox.java:161)
... 14 more
[PostgreSQL-Hackers] JDBC connections to 9.1
| Tweet |
|
Search Discussions
-
Bernd Helmle at Apr 18, 2011 at 2:21 pm ⇧
A quick check with an application here gives the following with JDBC--On 18. April 2011 09:44:38 -0400 Tom Lane wrote:Hmm, what shows up in the postmaster log?
I'm getting JDBC exceptions when I try to connect to 9.1 (master) with
the postgresql-9.0-801.jdbc3.jar I don't have this issue with 9.0.
loglevel=2
16:09:47.910 (1) PostgreSQL 9.1devel JDBC4 (build 900)
16:09:47.914 (1) Trying to establish a protocol version 3 connection to
localhost:5438
16:09:47.930 (1) FE=> StartupPacket(user=bernd, database=mailstore,
client_encoding=UNICODE, DateStyle=ISO, extra_float_digits=2)
16:09:47.933 (1) <=BE AuthenticationOk
16:09:47.942 (1) <=BE ParameterStatus(application_name = )
16:09:47.942 (1) <=BE ParameterStatus(client_encoding = UTF8)
org.postgresql.util.PSQLException: Protocol error. Session setup failed.
at
org.postgresql.core.v3.ConnectionFactoryImpl.readStartupMessages(ConnectionFactoryImpl.java:498)
at
org.postgresql.core.v3.ConnectionFactoryImpl.openConnectionImpl(ConnectionFactoryImpl.java:112)
at
org.postgresql.core.ConnectionFactory.openConnection(ConnectionFactory.java:66)
at
org.postgresql.jdbc2.AbstractJdbc2Connection.(AbstractJdbc3Connection.java:30)
at
org.postgresql.jdbc3g.AbstractJdbc3gConnection.(AbstractJdbc4Connection.java:32)
at org.postgresql.jdbc4.Jdbc4Connection.(Driver.java:393)
at org.postgresql.Driver.connect(Driver.java:267)
at java.sql.DriverManager.getConnection(DriverManager.java:582)
at java.sql.DriverManager.getConnection(DriverManager.java:154)
at de.oopsware.mailstore.PGSQLMailstore.connect(Unknown Source)
at de.oopsware.mailstore.PGSQLMailstore.connect(Unknown Source)
at mailstore.main(Unknown Source)
SQLException: SQLState(08P01)
getConnection failed: org.postgresql.util.PSQLException: Protocol error.
Session setup failed.
org.postgresql.util.PSQLException: Protocol error. Session setup failed.
Hmm, seems it stumbles while reading client_encoding....
--
Thanks
Bernd -
Devrim Gündüz at Apr 18, 2011 at 2:29 pm ⇧
This is probably similar to what I had a couple weeks ago. With today'sOn Mon, 2011-04-18 at 16:17 +0200, Bernd Helmle wrote:
Hmm, seems it stumbles while reading client_encoding....
new minor releases, I get:
$ psql
psql: invalid connection option "client_encoding"
(I was getting another message before)
This is 9.1's psql connecting to 9.1's server. For some reason, psql
uses 9.0 client libs, so if I export LD_LIBRARY_PATH, everything works:
$ LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/usr/pgsql-9.1/lib psql
...
Could it be the same thing?--
Devrim GÜNDÜZ
Principal Systems Engineer @ EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
PostgreSQL Danışmanı/Consultant, Red Hat Certified Engineer
Community: devrim~PostgreSQL.org, devrim.gunduz~linux.org.tr
http://www.gunduz.org Twitter: http://twitter.com/devrimgunduz -
Bernd Helmle at Apr 18, 2011 at 2:34 pm ⇧
ConnectionFactoryImpl.readStartupMessages() has this:--On 18. April 2011 16:17:57 +0200 Bernd Helmle wrote:
16:09:47.942 (1) <=BE ParameterStatus(client_encoding = UTF8)
org.postgresql.util.PSQLException: Protocol error. Session setup failed.
at
org.postgresql.core.v3.ConnectionFactoryImpl.readStartupMessages(ConnectionFa
ctoryImpl.java:498)
else if (name.equals("client_encoding"))
{
if (!value.equals("UNICODE"))
throw new PSQLException(GT.tr("Protocol error. Session
setup failed."), PSQLState.PROTOCOL_VIOLATION);
pgStream.setEncoding(Encoding.getDatabaseEncoding("UNICODE"));
}
If i am reading it correct, it reads "UTF8" from the backend, while expecting
"UNICODE" only. Not sure what change has caused this, though. If i extend the
check to include "UTF8", everything seems to work.
--
Thanks
Bernd -
Tom Lane at Apr 18, 2011 at 2:57 pm ⇧
I am --- when I redid the GUC assign_hook logic a few weeks ago,Bernd Helmle writes:
If i am reading it correct, it reads "UTF8" from the backend, while
expecting "UNICODE" only. Not sure what change has caused this,
though.
I changed the client_encoding code so that it shows the normalized
(official) name of the encoding, not whatever random string the client
sent over. For instance, previous versions:
regression=# set client_encoding = 'UnIcOdE';
SET
regression=# show client_encoding ;
client_encoding
-----------------
UnIcOdE
(1 row)
versus HEAD:
regression=# set client_encoding = 'UnIcOdE';
SET
regression=# show client_encoding ;
client_encoding
-----------------
UTF8
(1 row)
I wasn't aware that JDBC would fail on that. It's pretty annoying that
it does, but maybe we should grin and bear it, ie revert the change to
canonicalize the GUC's value?
regards, tom lane
-
Robert Haas at Apr 18, 2011 at 3:10 pm ⇧
Ouch. I hate to revert that, since it seems like a clear improvement.On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 10:57 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
Bernd Helmle <mailings@oopsware.de> writes:If i am reading it correct, it reads "UTF8" from the backend, whileI am --- when I redid the GUC assign_hook logic a few weeks ago,
expecting "UNICODE" only. Not sure what change has caused this,
though.
I changed the client_encoding code so that it shows the normalized
(official) name of the encoding, not whatever random string the client
sent over. For instance, previous versions:
regression=# set client_encoding = 'UnIcOdE';
SET
regression=# show client_encoding ;
client_encoding
-----------------
UnIcOdE
(1 row)
versus HEAD:
regression=# set client_encoding = 'UnIcOdE';
SET
regression=# show client_encoding ;
client_encoding
-----------------
UTF8
(1 row)
I wasn't aware that JDBC would fail on that. It's pretty annoying that
it does, but maybe we should grin and bear it, ie revert the change to
canonicalize the GUC's value?
But I also hate to break JDBC. Ouch.
-
Dave Cramer at Apr 18, 2011 at 3:12 pm ⇧
Older drivers will fail for sure. We can fix newer drivers, but if weOn Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 10:57 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
Bernd Helmle <mailings@oopsware.de> writes:If i am reading it correct, it reads "UTF8" from the backend, whileI am --- when I redid the GUC assign_hook logic a few weeks ago,
expecting "UNICODE" only. Not sure what change has caused this,
though.
I changed the client_encoding code so that it shows the normalized
(official) name of the encoding, not whatever random string the client
sent over. For instance, previous versions:
regression=# set client_encoding = 'UnIcOdE';
SET
regression=# show client_encoding ;
client_encoding
-----------------
UnIcOdE
(1 row)
versus HEAD:
regression=# set client_encoding = 'UnIcOdE';
SET
regression=# show client_encoding ;
client_encoding
-----------------
UTF8
(1 row)
I wasn't aware that JDBC would fail on that. It's pretty annoying that
it does, but maybe we should grin and bear it, ie revert the change to
canonicalize the GUC's value?
regards, tom lane
leave it we will see a slew of bug reports.
The reason the driver does this is to guarantee the client encoding is unicode.
Dave Cramer
dave.cramer(at)credativ(dot)ca
http://www.credativ.ca
-
Tom Lane at Apr 18, 2011 at 3:24 pm ⇧
Yeah. I'm thinking what we should do here is revert the change, with aDave Cramer writes:On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 10:57 AM, Tom Lane wrote:Older drivers will fail for sure. We can fix newer drivers, but if we
I wasn't aware that JDBC would fail on that. It's pretty annoying that
it does, but maybe we should grin and bear it, ie revert the change to
canonicalize the GUC's value?
leave it we will see a slew of bug reports.
note in the source about why, and also change the JDBC driver to send
and expect "UTF8" not "UNICODE" (which as Kevin says is more correct
anyway). Then in a few releases' time we can un-revert the server
change.
regards, tom lane
-
Dave Cramer at Apr 18, 2011 at 3:42 pm ⇧
Well initially my concern was that people would have a challenge inOn Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 11:24 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
Dave Cramer <pg@fastcrypt.com> writes:Yeah. I'm thinking what we should do here is revert the change, with aOn Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 10:57 AM, Tom Lane wrote:Older drivers will fail for sure. We can fix newer drivers, but if we
I wasn't aware that JDBC would fail on that. It's pretty annoying that
it does, but maybe we should grin and bear it, ie revert the change to
canonicalize the GUC's value?
leave it we will see a slew of bug reports.
note in the source about why, and also change the JDBC driver to send
and expect "UTF8" not "UNICODE" (which as Kevin says is more correct
anyway). Then in a few releases' time we can un-revert the server
change.
the case where they had to re-certify their application if we made
this change, however I realize they will have to do this anyway since
upgrading to 9.1 is what necessitates it.
So I'm less concerned with bug reports since people can just upgrade both
Dave Cramer
dave.cramer(at)credativ(dot)ca
http://www.credativ.ca
-
Tom Lane at Apr 18, 2011 at 4:34 pm ⇧
I don't see any backwards compatibility risk, if that's what you mean.Dave Cramer writes:On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 11:24 AM, Tom Lane wrote:Well initially my concern was that people would have a challenge in
Yeah. I'm thinking what we should do here is revert the change, with a
note in the source about why, and also change the JDBC driver to send
and expect "UTF8" not "UNICODE" (which as Kevin says is more correct
anyway). Then in a few releases' time we can un-revert the server
change.
the case where they had to re-certify their application if we made
this change, however I realize they will have to do this anyway since
upgrading to 9.1 is what necessitates it.
Every backend release since 7.3 has treated client_encoding 'UTF8' and
'UNICODE' the same, and earlier releases didn't accept either one.
regards, tom lane
-
Mike Fowler at Apr 18, 2011 at 4:53 pm ⇧
As there seems to be a consensus forming for fixing the JDBC driver,On 18/04/11 17:12, Tom Lane wrote:
Dave Cramer<pg@fastcrypt.com> writes:Well initially my concern was that people would have a challenge inI don't see any backwards compatibility risk, if that's what you mean.
the case where they had to re-certify their application if we made
this change, however I realize they will have to do this anyway since
upgrading to 9.1 is what necessitates it.
Every backend release since 7.3 has treated client_encoding 'UTF8' and
'UNICODE' the same, and earlier releases didn't accept either one.
regards, tom lane
I've taken the liberty do so at the risk of being shot down. The patch
is fairly straightforward, just changing UNICODE to UTF8 in a number of
files including the translation files. I've tested this against 9.1devel
(HEAD) and 8.4.7. For each database version I build and the tests
running JDKs 1.4.2_19, 1.5.0_22 and 1.6.0_2. All on 32-bit.
Regards,
--
Mike Fowler
Registered Linux user: 379787 -
Kris Jurka at Apr 19, 2011 at 1:20 am ⇧
Thanks, applied, mostly. It's great to have a patch for a problem beforeOn Mon, 18 Apr 2011, Mike Fowler wrote:On 18/04/11 17:12, Tom Lane wrote:As there seems to be a consensus forming for fixing the JDBC driver, I've
Dave Cramer<pg@fastcrypt.com> writes:Well initially my concern was that people would have a challenge inI don't see any backwards compatibility risk, if that's what you mean.
the case where they had to re-certify their application if we made
this change, however I realize they will have to do this anyway since
upgrading to 9.1 is what necessitates it.
Every backend release since 7.3 has treated client_encoding 'UTF8' and
'UNICODE' the same, and earlier releases didn't accept either one.
regards, tom lane
taken the liberty do so at the risk of being shot down. The patch is fairly
straightforward, just changing UNICODE to UTF8 in a number of files including
the translation files. I've tested this against 9.1devel (HEAD) and 8.4.7.
For each database version I build and the tests running JDKs 1.4.2_19,
1.5.0_22 and 1.6.0_2. All on 32-bit.
you even know it exists.
I didn't modify the .po files. I doubt this will change the adjacent
translation wording, but directly patching .po files is only something to
do in more dire circumstances (like needing to make a backpatch to an old
branch that won't get translators to look at it before the next release.)
I also discarded your changes to AbstractJdbc3Statement. Those Unicode
mentions are from the interface Javadoc, so I left them alone.
Kris Jurka
-
Tom Lane at Apr 19, 2011 at 5:38 am ⇧
For purposes of the notes in the server-side fix, could you state whichKris Jurka writes:On Mon, 18 Apr 2011, Mike Fowler wrote:Thanks, applied, mostly. It's great to have a patch for a problem before
As there seems to be a consensus forming for fixing the JDBC driver, I've
taken the liberty do so at the risk of being shot down. The patch is fairly
straightforward, just changing UNICODE to UTF8 in a number of files including
the translation files. I've tested this against 9.1devel (HEAD) and 8.4.7.
For each database version I build and the tests running JDKs 1.4.2_19,
1.5.0_22 and 1.6.0_2. All on 32-bit.
you even know it exists.
JDBC driver versions these changes will first appear in?
regards, tom lane
-
Kris Jurka at Apr 19, 2011 at 3:33 pm ⇧
This is in 9.1dev-900 and won't be backpatched.On Tue, 19 Apr 2011, Tom Lane wrote:
Kris Jurka <books@ejurka.com> writes:For purposes of the notes in the server-side fix, could you state whichOn Mon, 18 Apr 2011, Mike Fowler wrote:Thanks, applied, mostly. It's great to have a patch for a problem before
As there seems to be a consensus forming for fixing the JDBC driver, I've
taken the liberty do so at the risk of being shot down. The patch is fairly
straightforward, just changing UNICODE to UTF8 in a number of files including
the translation files. I've tested this against 9.1devel (HEAD) and 8.4.7.
For each database version I build and the tests running JDKs 1.4.2_19,
1.5.0_22 and 1.6.0_2. All on 32-bit.
you even know it exists.
JDBC driver versions these changes will first appear in?
http://jdbc.postgresql.org/download.html#development
Kris Jurka
-
Tom Lane at Apr 19, 2011 at 4:32 pm ⇧
OK, thanks. I've committed a patch to keep the server fromKris Jurka writes:On Tue, 19 Apr 2011, Tom Lane wrote:This is in 9.1dev-900 and won't be backpatched.
For purposes of the notes in the server-side fix, could you state which
JDBC driver versions these changes will first appear in?
canonicalizing a setting of "UNICODE" (but not any other variations).
That should keep older drivers from breaking, and in a few years we
can remove the kluge, if anyone bothers ...
regards, tom lane
-
Kevin Grittner at Apr 18, 2011 at 3:14 pm ⇧
The whole area of character sets and encoding schemes is confusingTom Lane wrote:
I changed the client_encoding code so that it shows the normalized
(official) name of the encoding, not whatever random string the
client sent over. For instance, previous versions:
regression=# set client_encoding = 'UnIcOdE';
SET
enough without accepting a character set name as an encoding scheme
specification. I'll bet that in five or ten years we'll be
accepting more than one encoding scheme for the Unicode character
set.I wasn't aware that JDBC would fail on that. It's pretty annoyingCan we fix the JDBC driver rather than reverting this? Long run,
that it does, but maybe we should grin and bear it, ie revert the
change to canonicalize the GUC's value?
I'd be in favor of just rejecting a character set name as a client
encoding specification. I think inferring one is being generous.
-Kevin
-
Mike Fowler at Apr 18, 2011 at 3:14 pm ⇧
Am I right in thinking that would be that change committed on the 7thOn 18/04/11 15:57, Tom Lane wrote:
Bernd Helmle<mailings@oopsware.de> writes:If i am reading it correct, it reads "UTF8" from the backend, whileI am --- when I redid the GUC assign_hook logic a few weeks ago,
expecting "UNICODE" only. Not sure what change has caused this,
though.
I changed the client_encoding code so that it shows the normalized
(official) name of the encoding, not whatever random string the client
sent over. For instance, previous versions:
regression=# set client_encoding = 'UnIcOdE';
SET
regression=# show client_encoding ;
client_encoding
-----------------
UnIcOdE
(1 row)
versus HEAD:
regression=# set client_encoding = 'UnIcOdE';
SET
regression=# show client_encoding ;
client_encoding
-----------------
UTF8
(1 row)
I wasn't aware that JDBC would fail on that. It's pretty annoying that
it does, but maybe we should grin and bear it, ie revert the change to
canonicalize the GUC's value?
regards, tom lane
(http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-committers/2011-04/msg00039.php) ?
I've just run the JDBC test build on my machine and it fails dismally
with this very message repeated over and over again. What concerns me
most is that (assuming my dates are right) the JDBC driver has been
broken for 11 days and no one noticed. This would lead me to believe
that there is no JDBC build server. What would it take to set one up? If
someone can point me to a test machine I'd happily assist in setting one up.
As for the breakage itself I'm OK with a new driver version for a new
database version and from my experience people expect that. I recall a
number of people asking me if an 8.4 driver would be OK to use against 9
before the 9 version was stable.
Regards,
--
Mike Fowler
Registered Linux user: 379787 -
Dave Cramer at Apr 18, 2011 at 3:23 pm ⇧
One would need a machine which supports java 1.4, 1.5, and 1.6 sinceOn Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 11:14 AM, Mike Fowler wrote:On 18/04/11 15:57, Tom Lane wrote:Am I right in thinking that would be that change committed on the 7th
Bernd Helmle<mailings@oopsware.de> writes:If i am reading it correct, it reads "UTF8" from the backend, whileI am --- when I redid the GUC assign_hook logic a few weeks ago,
expecting "UNICODE" only. Not sure what change has caused this,
though.
I changed the client_encoding code so that it shows the normalized
(official) name of the encoding, not whatever random string the client
sent over. For instance, previous versions:
regression=# set client_encoding = 'UnIcOdE';
SET
regression=# show client_encoding ;
client_encoding
-----------------
UnIcOdE
(1 row)
versus HEAD:
regression=# set client_encoding = 'UnIcOdE';
SET
regression=# show client_encoding ;
client_encoding
-----------------
UTF8
(1 row)
I wasn't aware that JDBC would fail on that. It's pretty annoying that
it does, but maybe we should grin and bear it, ie revert the change to
canonicalize the GUC's value?
regards, tom lane
(http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-committers/2011-04/msg00039.php) ?
I've just run the JDBC test build on my machine and it fails dismally with
this very message repeated over and over again. What concerns me most is
that (assuming my dates are right) the JDBC driver has been broken for 11
days and no one noticed. This would lead me to believe that there is no JDBC
build server. What would it take to set one up? If someone can point me to a
test machine I'd happily assist in setting one up.
As for the breakage itself I'm OK with a new driver version for a new
database version and from my experience people expect that. I recall a
number of people asking me if an 8.4 driver would be OK to use against 9
before the 9 version was stable.
Regards,
the driver builds all 3 versions. There's actually a 4th between 1.4
and 1.5 but I don't recall the specifics
Dave--
Mike Fowler
Registered Linux user: 379787
--
Sent via pgsql-jdbc mailing list (pgsql-jdbc@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-jdbc -
Tom Lane at Apr 18, 2011 at 3:25 pm ⇧
+1 for doing something along that line.Mike Fowler writes:On 18/04/11 15:57, Tom Lane wrote:Am I right in thinking that would be that change committed on the 7th
I am --- when I redid the GUC assign_hook logic a few weeks ago,
I changed the client_encoding code so that it shows the normalized
(official) name of the encoding, not whatever random string the client
sent over. For instance, previous versions:
(http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-committers/2011-04/msg00039.php) ?
Yes, that one.
What concerns me
most is that (assuming my dates are right) the JDBC driver has been
broken for 11 days and no one noticed. This would lead me to believe
that there is no JDBC build server. What would it take to set one up?
regards, tom lane
-
Andrew Dunstan at Apr 18, 2011 at 4:42 pm ⇧
All you'd need to do is write a step for a buildfarm animal to fetch theOn 04/18/2011 11:25 AM, Tom Lane wrote:+1 for doing something along that line.
What concerns me most is that (assuming my dates are right) the JDBC driver has been
broken for 11 days and no one noticed. This would lead me to believe
that there is no JDBC build server. What would it take to set one up?
JDBC driver and run some tests, and run it in a buildfarm client
somewhere. The server code is quite agnostic about the steps that are
reported on.
IOW in addition to a running buildfarm member you need to write a small
amount (< 100 lines, possibly much less) of perl code.
cheers
andrew
-
Mike Fowler at Apr 18, 2011 at 4:43 pm ⇧
I've found the entry on the Developer WikiOn 18/04/11 17:35, Andrew Dunstan wrote:All you'd need to do is write a step for a buildfarm animal to fetchOn 04/18/2011 11:25 AM, Tom Lane wrote:+1 for doing something along that line.
What concerns me most is that (assuming my dates are right) the
JDBC driver has been
broken for 11 days and no one noticed. This would lead me to believe
that there is no JDBC build server. What would it take to set one up?
the JDBC driver and run some tests, and run it in a buildfarm client
somewhere. The server code is quite agnostic about the steps that are
reported on.
IOW in addition to a running buildfarm member you need to write a
small amount (< 100 lines, possibly much less) of perl code.
cheers
andrew
(http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_Buildfarm_Howto). What I'll
do is set-up three "farms" on my machine - one for 1.4, one for 1.5 and
one for 1.6. It's been a while since I've had an excuse to write some
Perl! I can't guarantee when I'll have it done as I'm away for a little
over a week from Wednesday and I'm not allowed internet access!
Regards,
--
Mike Fowler
Registered Linux user: 379787 -
Steve Singer at Apr 18, 2011 at 2:27 pm ⇧
LOG: unexpected EOF on client connectionOn 11-04-18 09:44 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
Steve Singer<ssinger@ca.afilias.info> writes:I'm getting JDBC exceptions when I try to connect to 9.1 (master) withHmm, what shows up in the postmaster log?
the postgresql-9.0-801.jdbc3.jar I don't have this issue with 9.0.
regards, tom lane
Related Discussions
Discussion Navigation
| view | thread | post |
Discussion Overview
| group | pgsql-hackers
|
| categories | postgresql |
| posted | Apr 18, '11 at 1:32p |
| active | Apr 19, '11 at 4:32p |
| posts | 23 |
| users | 10 |
| website | postgresql.org... |
| irc | #postgresql |
