If you have an solid-state disk drive (SSD) and are running Windows XP (say, with a netbook) and you are having performance issues, make sure that your page file is set to a fixed size.
To do this, tap Windows Key + Break or Control Panel > Performance and Maintenance > System or Control Panel > System, depending on your preferences.
Under "System Properties," go to the "Advanced" tab.
Click the "Settings" button under "Performance."
Under "Performance Options," go to the "Advanced" tab.
Click the "Change" button under "Virtual memory."
Under "Drive [Volume Label]", pick the drive that has a "Paging File Size" next to it.
Under "Paging file size for selected drive," ensure that "Custom size" is selected and set both the initial size and maximum size to the same value (preferably the "Recommended" value listed at the bottom of the dialog.)
Hit the "Set" button.
Hit "OK" and continue to hit "OK" until you are back to the desktop.
You may have to reboot afterward.
March 18, 2009
March 11, 2009
Date Of Creation According To Oracle
Oracle is meant for big iron databases.
If you are crunching numbers on data for dates before January 1, 1753, you are either using a varchar field storing the UTC value of the date or you are using Oracle.
But what if you are trying to go back further, say, to the beginning of recorded human history? Well, the DATE column in Oracle can't handle that.
Evidently, they thought that nobody would want to store a date prior to the dates that "young earth" creationists point to as the date the world was created.
So if your date is before 4713 B.C., tough luck. ;)
Admittedly, this does cover the date range back to the earliest reported date in the Egyptian calendar (4241 B.C.), but that still misses out on the nearly six thousand years of Egyptian pre-history.
If you are crunching numbers on data for dates before January 1, 1753, you are either using a varchar field storing the UTC value of the date or you are using Oracle.
But what if you are trying to go back further, say, to the beginning of recorded human history? Well, the DATE column in Oracle can't handle that.
Evidently, they thought that nobody would want to store a date prior to the dates that "young earth" creationists point to as the date the world was created.
So if your date is before 4713 B.C., tough luck. ;)
Admittedly, this does cover the date range back to the earliest reported date in the Egyptian calendar (4241 B.C.), but that still misses out on the nearly six thousand years of Egyptian pre-history.
February 19, 2009
Duh.
It's always nice when you spend time reinventing the wheel when you don't need to.
For example, take my recent post on associating a label to an ASP.NET mangled control name.
Turns out the functionality is built into ASP.NET.
Let's say you have the following ASP.NET code...
<asp:label runat="server" text="Search" /><asp:textbox id="query" runat="server" />
...and you want to link the Label to the TextBox. Set the AssociatedControlID property on the Label and it will automatically handle mangled control names for you.
<asp:label runat="server" text="Search" AssociatedControlID="query" /><asp:textbox id="query" runat="server" />
I'm still going to leave up my original post because knowing how to recursively work with HtmlControls is a good thing, but I hate it when I miss something this obvious.
For example, take my recent post on associating a label to an ASP.NET mangled control name.
Turns out the functionality is built into ASP.NET.
Let's say you have the following ASP.NET code...
<asp:label runat="server" text="Search" /><asp:textbox id="query" runat="server" />
...and you want to link the Label to the TextBox. Set the AssociatedControlID property on the Label and it will automatically handle mangled control names for you.
<asp:label runat="server" text="Search" AssociatedControlID="query" /><asp:textbox id="query" runat="server" />
I'm still going to leave up my original post because knowing how to recursively work with HtmlControls is a good thing, but I hate it when I miss something this obvious.
February 15, 2009
Come On, Utah, Shape Up!
According to the Pew Study, only 22% of Mormons accept evolution as the best explanation for the origins of human life on Earth.
Now, I think we can at least in part blame the way the question was phrased. (Evolution has nothing to do with the origin of life, just the diversity of life.) That said, I find it ironic that a church that would help create one of the top 20% biology programs in the nation has a membership where 4 out of 5 members deny the very keystone science associated with it.
But I guess it shouldn't surprise me. The position of the LDS church has been quite clear...
"Diversity of opinion does not necessitate intolerance of spirit, nor should it embitter or set rational beings against each other... Our religion is not hostile to real science. That which is demonstrated, we accept with joy; but vain philosophy, human theory and mere speculations of men, we do not accept nor do we adopt anything contrary to divine revelation or to good common sense."*
No further official statement has been made by the church since then. Essentially, they are saying that where the word of God is silent, the church will accept anything, but anything that potentially conflicts with the "word" shall not be accepted.
It's sad when Texas, even with the massive SBOE debacle, is still more sane than my home state...
* First Presidency (Joseph F. Smith, John R. Winder, Anthon H. Lund), "Words in Season from the First Presidency", Deseret Evening News, 1910-12-17, sec. 1, p. 3.
Now, I think we can at least in part blame the way the question was phrased. (Evolution has nothing to do with the origin of life, just the diversity of life.) That said, I find it ironic that a church that would help create one of the top 20% biology programs in the nation has a membership where 4 out of 5 members deny the very keystone science associated with it.
But I guess it shouldn't surprise me. The position of the LDS church has been quite clear...
"Diversity of opinion does not necessitate intolerance of spirit, nor should it embitter or set rational beings against each other... Our religion is not hostile to real science. That which is demonstrated, we accept with joy; but vain philosophy, human theory and mere speculations of men, we do not accept nor do we adopt anything contrary to divine revelation or to good common sense."*
No further official statement has been made by the church since then. Essentially, they are saying that where the word of God is silent, the church will accept anything, but anything that potentially conflicts with the "word" shall not be accepted.
It's sad when Texas, even with the massive SBOE debacle, is still more sane than my home state...
* First Presidency (Joseph F. Smith, John R. Winder, Anthon H. Lund), "Words in Season from the First Presidency", Deseret Evening News, 1910-12-17, sec. 1, p. 3.
February 13, 2009
The Crunch Is Upon Me
Today was the last day of a twelve-day shift.
I've got a three-day weekend ahead of me, and then I start another eleven-day shift.
I'll be taking a single day off for a Shackmeet, then I'm on for another six days.
I'll be taking that weekend off to head down to Austin for the second Cinematic Titanic live riff I'll have ever attended, and then...crunch.
Twenty-six days straight.
This will be a living hell, but the end result will be worth it.
I've got a three-day weekend ahead of me, and then I start another eleven-day shift.
I'll be taking a single day off for a Shackmeet, then I'm on for another six days.
I'll be taking that weekend off to head down to Austin for the second Cinematic Titanic live riff I'll have ever attended, and then...crunch.
Twenty-six days straight.
This will be a living hell, but the end result will be worth it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)