Re: [GENERAL] Encrypted column

On 6/5/07, Tino Wildenhain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Ranieri Mazili schrieb: > Hello, > > I need to store users and passwords on a table and I want to store it > encrypted, but I don't found documentation about it, how can I create a > table with columns "user" and "password" with column "passwo

Re: [GENERAL] Encrypted column

On 6/5/07, Marko Kreen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 6/5/07, Tino Wildenhain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ranieri Mazili schrieb: > > Hello, > > > > I need to store users and passwords on a table and I want to store it > > encrypted, but I don't found documentation about it, how can I create a >

Re: [GENERAL] Encrypted column

On 6/5/07, Marko Kreen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 6/5/07, Marko Kreen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > both md5 and sha1 are actually easier to bruteforce than > the old DES-based crypt. If this statement seems weird - the problem is the speed. MD5 and SHA1 are just faster algorithms than des-cry

Re: [GENERAL] Linux distro

On 8/1/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello, > > I bought a Dell server and I am going to use it for installing PostgrSQL > 8.2.4. I always used Windows so far and I would like now to install a > Linux distribution on the new server. Any suggestion on which distribution > ? Fedo

Re: [GENERAL] Linux distro

On 8/1/07, Douglas McNaught <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Joseph S <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > My small gripes about Ubuntu are: > > 1) rpm, for all its faults, is still better than using apt > > You *must* be joking. In Debian and Ubuntu, I've never had a tenth of > the dependency hell tha

Re: [GENERAL] Linux distro

On 8/2/07, Andrej Ricnik-Bay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 8/3/07, Merlin Moncure <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > they do, but experience has shown it is prudent to be able to > > administrate the hardware directly from the box. > > I'm curious: which aspect of hardware administration > on a Li

[GENERAL] PG 8.0.4, Centos and 64 bit

Hello, I am getting ready to install a new server for a new postgres install, and I'm looking for a little advice.  The server is a dual opteron system, and I plan on using CentOS 4.1 x86_64 for the OS.  I'm going to do my best to make it s pure 64 bit system. Does anyone have any experience runn

Re: [GENERAL] Select all invalid e-mail addresses

On 10/20/05, Douglas McNaught <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It performs a MX-lookup, which IMHO is the best way to check for validity.But that's expensive and slow, and doesn't tell you whether the userpart of the address is valid (and in general, there's no way to determine that short of actually s

Re: [GENERAL] SHA1 authentication

On 10/27/05, Bruno Wolff III <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Mon, Oct 24, 2005 at 11:33:50 +0200,  Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:>> By all means, submit a patch but there's no real hurry right now. We > should probably move straight to something more secure anyway, maybe> SHA-256 o

[GENERAL] libpq version in rpm packages

I just set up a new server and would like to use rpms to manage the software on this one.  I've done the compile from source thing most of the time, but over time it seems to get messy. I'm using CentOS 4.2, which only has packages for postgres 7.4, but I very much want to use 8.1.  I installed th

Re: [GENERAL] libpq version in rpm packages

Thanks for that rpm. I noticed that the x86_64 version of the compat libs installs the files in /usr/lib, while the x86_64 postgresql-libs rpm uses /usr/lib64.  Is there are reason for that?  Otherwise, I'd prefer to keep all the 64bit libs in lib64. On 11/9/05, Devrim GUNDUZ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> w

Re: [GENERAL] A query planner that learns

On 10/17/06, Madison Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: AgentM wrote:> Alvaro's advice is sound. If the patent holder can prove that a> developer looked at a patent (for example, from an email in a mailing> list archive) and the project proceeded with the implementation > regardless, malice can been

Re: [GENERAL] A query planner that learns

On 10/17/06, Madison Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Brian Mathis wrote:> I also am NAL, but I know enough about the patent system (in the US) to> know that ignorance *IS* a defense.  If you are ignorant of the patent,> you only have to pay the damages.  If you knew about the pate

Re: [GENERAL] Dependency conflicts on CentOS 4.4

On 1/4/07, Tony Caduto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Gunnar Wagenknecht wrote: Do I need to look for a different 'perl-DBD-Pg' that doesn't depend on > 'libpq.so.3' or should 'libpq.so.3' be provided by > 'postgresql-libs-8.2.0-2PGDG.i686.rpm'? > Just make a symbolic link from the shipped lib

[GENERAL] Problem with postgresql-docs-8.1.4-1PGDG.i686.rpm

I am trying to upgrade my installation from 8.1.3 to 8.1.4, and when I try to upgrade the postgresql-docs package, I am getting the following error from 'rpm -Uvh':error: postgresql-docs-8.1.4-1PGDG.i686.rpm : MD5 digest: BAD Expected(a6f3196317b296ef555f47f343a6871b) != (b9dcbf1533565efb9d629e25a4

Re: [GENERAL] customizing pg_dump together with copy.c's DoCopy function

pg_dump by default dumps to STDOUT, which you should use in a pipeline to perform any modifications.  To me this seems pretty tricky, but should be doable.  Modifying pg_dump really strikes me as the wrong way to go about it.  Pipelines operate in memory, and should be very fast, depending on how y