On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 10:25 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Michael Clark codingni...@gmail.com writes:
PID 8574 is actually iTunes, not PG,
iTunes? What is that doing running under PG's userid?
We back our client application with PG, each OSX user gets their own
instance of PG
On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 1:25 PM, Alban Hertroys haram...@gmail.com wrote:
We back our client application with PG,
each OSX user gets their own instance of PG.
Are you certain that's necessary?
It was a decision made, weighing various trade-offs, 4 years ago now.
In the wild this
On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 11:30 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Sebastien Boisvert sebastienboisv...@yahoo.com writes:
Is this mechanism documented anywhere (besides source code)?
No, not really.
It looks like PG will only clean it up if there's no other process
running at all on
:29 PM, Michael Clark codingni...@gmail.com
wrote:
For example, if I insert like so:
INSERT INTO sometable (startdate) values ('1750-08-21 21:17:00+00:00');
What's the reason for you inserting with an offest instead of letting
the client timezone set it for you? Just wondering.
Note
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 5:00 AM, hubert depesz lubaczewski
dep...@depesz.com wrote:
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 05:29:14PM -0400, Michael Clark wrote:
For example, if I insert like so:
INSERT INTO sometable (startdate) values ('1750-08-21 21:17:00+00:00');
I get the following when I select
Hello all,
I have a weird situation I am trying to work through, and could use some
help if anyone can provide some.
I have a table with a column to store timestamp with time zone, and when I
store an older take (before 1895 or so), the value I get back from PG when
doing a select seems odd and
Hello.
Thanks for the response.
The value being returned from PG, with the odd offset is expected?
Thanks again,
Michael.
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 5:50 PM, Steve Crawford
scrawf...@pinpointresearch.com wrote:
On 08/21/2012 02:29 PM, Michael Clark wrote:
Hello all,
I have a weird
...).
Again, thanks so much for the help.
Michael.
On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 6:10 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Michael Clark codingni...@gmail.com writes:
In doing some experiments I found that using
PQsendQueryParams/PQconsumeInput/PQisBusy/PQgetResult produces slower
results than
On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 11:15 AM, A.M. age...@themactionfaction.com wrote:
On Oct 28, 2010, at 11:08 AM, Michael Clark wrote:
Hello all.
Thanks a lot for the responses, they are appreciated.
I think I now understand the folly of my loop, and how that was
negatively
impacting my
Hello everyone.
I have been investigating the PG async calls and trying to determine whether
I should go down the road of using them.
In doing some experiments I found that using
PQsendQueryParams/PQconsumeInput/PQisBusy/PQgetResult produces slower
results than simply calling PQexecParams.
Upon
Hello Craig - thanks for the reply. I will reply below.
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 9:34 PM, Craig Ringer
cr...@postnewspapers.com.auwrote:
On 16/12/2009 6:39 AM, Michael Clark wrote:
Hello all,
Over the past 6 months or so I have posted to the list a couple times
looking for information
Hi Scott and Craig,
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 9:45 PM, Craig Ringer
cr...@postnewspapers.com.auwrote:
On 16/12/2009 9:07 AM, Scott Marlowe wrote:
I'd also recommend moving off of OSX as you're using a minority OS as
far as databases are concerned, and you won't have a very large
community to
Hi Greg, thanks for the reply!
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 10:52 PM, Greg Smith g...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Michael Clark wrote:
Secondly, I ask about an alternative solution to the corruption problem
because with preliminary testing we have seen a significant degradation in
performance. So
On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 5:41 AM, Florian Weimer fwei...@bfk.de wrote:
* Craig Ringer:
On 16/12/2009 3:54 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
* Michael Clark:
and with no power protection, then I expect it does. Add laptop
users with ageing/flakey batteries, laptops let go flat after they
go
On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 11:25 AM, Greg Smith g...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Florian Weimer wrote:
I hope that Mac OS X turns off write caches on low battery.
I've never heard of such a thing. The best you can do is try to push the
system into hibernation instead of going down hard. That
On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 2:05 PM, Greg Smith g...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Michael Clark wrote:
On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 11:25 AM, Greg Smith g...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Florian Weimer wrote:
I hope that Mac OS X turns off write caches on low battery.
I've never heard of such a thing
Hello all,
Over the past 6 months or so I have posted to the list a couple times
looking for information regarding recovering databases from corruption. At
the time the incidents of corruption among our users was very low, but the
frequency is starting to increase, most likely due to the
This thread was originally posted (incorrectly by me) to the hackers
mailing list. Moving the discussion to the gerenal.
Hi Greg,
That is what Pierre pointed out, and you are both right. I am using the
text mode.
But it seems pretty crazy that a 140meg bit of data goes to 1.3 gigs. Does
that
On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 1:48 PM, Greg Stark gsst...@mit.edu wrote:
On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 6:39 PM, Michael Clarkcodingni...@gmail.com
wrote:
But it seems pretty crazy that a 140meg bit of data goes to 1.3 gigs.
Does
that seem a bit excessive?
From what you posted earlier it looked like
19 matches
Mail list logo
