On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 1:25 PM, Alban Hertroys 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 scenario has
On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 10:25 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Michael Clark 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
On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 11:30 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Sebastien Boisvert 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 the pid listed in the postmaster.pid fi
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'
me on that and sending me down that road!
Michael.
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 12:19 AM, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 10:12 PM, Scott Marlowe
> wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 10:08 PM, Scott Marlowe
> wrote:
> >> On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 3:29 PM, Michael
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 a
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 i
On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 11:15 AM, A.M. 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
cancelling...).
Again, thanks so much for the help.
Michael.
On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 6:10 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Michael Clark writes:
> > In doing some experiments I found that using
> > PQsendQueryParams/PQconsumeInput/PQisBusy/PQgetResult produces slower
> > results t
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 s
On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 2:05 PM, Greg Smith wrote:
> Michael Clark wrote:
>
> On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 11:25 AM, Greg Smith wrote:
>
>> Florian Weimer wrote:
>>
>>> I hope that Mac OS X turns off write caches on low battery.
>>>
>>>
>>
&
On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 11:25 AM, Greg Smith 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 *should* cle
On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 5:41 AM, Florian Weimer 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
Hi Greg, thanks for the reply!
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 10:52 PM, Greg Smith 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
>
Hi Scott and Craig,
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 9:45 PM, Craig Ringer
wrote:
> 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 help out when things
Hello Craig - thanks for the reply. I will reply below.
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 9:34 PM, Craig Ringer
wrote:
> 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 in
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 increase
On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 1:48 PM, Greg Stark wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 6:39 PM, Michael Clark
> 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 lik
at 12:15 PM, Greg Stark wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 4:04 PM, Michael Clark
> wrote:
> > Hello - am I in the wrong mailing list for this sort of problem? :-
>
> Probably but it's also a pretty technical point and you're programming
> in C so it's kind of
19 matches
Mail list logo
