Re: [GENERAL] server log files

Tom, Thanks a lot! 2008/7/1 Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> $pg_ctl start > /dev/null > > If the postmaster fails to start, you won't know why. That's enough reason for me to continue using 'pg_ctl start -l'. ebi -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) To make c

[GENERAL] server log files

Hi Experts, I'm using PostgreSQL 8.3.3 and have a question about log files that PostgreSQL generates. There are two ways to specify the log file path 1)pg_ctl start -l http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.3/interactive/app-pg-ctl.html 2)server configuration (postgresql.conf) http://www.postgresql.

Re: [GENERAL] standard LOB support

Finally, I'd like to bring up my first question again. Is there any plan to support BLOB and CLOB in future releases? Don't you guys need a standard LOB feature? I no longer need it, though ;-p With the current large objects feature, I don't think it's not difficult to support it... Thanks, eb

Re: [GENERAL] standard LOB support

Thomas, > > According to JDBC 3.0 specifiction, those 4 methods may not be > > compatible to BLOB/CLOB. Some databases may support them to > access LOB > > data but not all databases. > > > Hmm. At least for updating LOBs, "my method" should be > "legal". This is a quote from jdbc-3_0-fr-spec

Re: [GENERAL] standard LOB support

Hi, > > I found that using getBinaryStream(), setBinaryStream(), > > getCharacterStream() > > and setCharacterStream() to handle LOBs across different DBMS > > is much more > > portable (and reliably) than using the Clob()/Blob() methods. > > According to JDBC 3.0 specifiction, those 4 methods

Re: [GENERAL] standard LOB support

Thomas, Thank you for your comment. > I found that using getBinaryStream(), setBinaryStream(), > getCharacterStream() > and setCharacterStream() to handle LOBs across different DBMS > is much more > portable (and reliably) than using the Clob()/Blob() methods. According to JDBC 3.0 specifict

Re: [GENERAL] standard LOB support

Hi, I found my understanding was incorrect. > > > Is there any plan to support BLOB and CLOB in future releases? > > > > > Looking at the spec, and postgresql's implementation, I can't > > see much reason you couldn't just use a domain to declare that > > a bytea is a blob and varchar is a clo

Re: [GENERAL] standard LOB support

Hi Scott, Thank you for your comment. > > Is there any plan to support BLOB and CLOB in future releases? > > > Looking at the spec, and postgresql's implementation, I can't > see much reason you couldn't just use a domain to declare that > a bytea is a blob and varchar is a clob. That sounds

Re: [GENERAL] PostgreSQL Installer for Windows x64

Magnus, Thank you for your quick reply. > > Can I get a PostgreSQL Installer for Windows x64(EM64T)? > > That for 32bit Windows is available at > > http://www.postgresql.org/ftp/win32/ but I need x64 native version. > > There is no such thing. PostgreSQL 64-bit is currently only > supported on

[GENERAL] PostgreSQL Installer for Windows x64

Hi, Can I get a PostgreSQL Installer for Windows x64(EM64T)? That for 32bit Windows is available at http://www.postgresql.org/ftp/win32/ but I need x64 native version. Any information would be appreciated. Thanks, ebi ---(end of broadcast)---

[GENERAL] standard LOB support

Hi, I'm developing a software that supports several RDBMSs including PostgreSQL. The software needs an ability to handle large objects and now it uses 'bytea' datatype for binary data and 'text' for text data. But for portability, I'd rather use BLOB and CLOB defined by the SQL standards indee