On Tue, 26 Jun 2001, Ryan C. Bonham wrote:
Here is how I successfully converted out SQL 7.0 Database to PostgreSQL..
Hope someone finds it useful, it needs to be rewritten, it was basically a
bunch of notes I put in a very poor outline.. If anyone wants to rewrite it
feel free, if not I will
Philip Molter [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I am using 7.1.2.
Drat.
Don't suppose you want to dig in there with a debugger when it happens?
You must be seeing some hard-to-replicate problem in VACUUM's
tuple-chain-moving logic. That stuff is pretty hairy, and I doubt
anyone will be able to intuit
On Wed, 27 Jun 2001, Edmund von der Burg wrote:
Hello,
For a project I am working on I needed some way of storing a variable for
the duration of a session and cooked this up, based on some previous posts
to this list:
create sequence variable_id_seq;
create table variables (
On Wed, Jun 27, 2001 at 11:30:54AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
: Philip Molter [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: I am using 7.1.2.
:
: Don't suppose you want to dig in there with a debugger when it happens?
: You must be seeing some hard-to-replicate problem in VACUUM's
: tuple-chain-moving logic. That
This was asked repeatedly the past 2 weeks. With regard to what is a sane value for
shmmax in the kernel? Oracle's recommendation is to go for 0.5*physical_memory. So I
gues that 0.25*physical_memory for Pg should be fine.
cheers,
thalis
---(end of
This is my first posting to the list, so I hope this is the right place
for this question.
I'm currently running postgres 6.5.2 on a Red Hat LINUX 6.2 web server.
I've installed postgres 7.1.2 on a Red Hat LINUX 7.0 platform. Reading
the README.rpm-dist has been confusing to say the least. I
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Randal L. Schwartz) writes:
$insert-execute(pack C*, 128); # BOMB, core dump
Core dump where? A stack backtrace might help ...
regards, tom lane
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 5: Have you checked our
Ludwig Meyerhoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Remember to actually read the README file !
please set environment variables POSTGRES_INCLUDE and POSTGRES_LIB !
Running make test
Make had some problems, maybe interrupted? Won't test
Running make
Ian Harding wrote:
I just got my copy of the programmers guide yesterday.
It is a printed copy of the document of the same name available online.
It is worth the money because you can read it in the bathroom, and because
hopefully Thomas Lochart (sic) gets some money. I found myself
snip
...This is not the same in my book, since I don't care
to run RHL in any kind of production environment...
snip
What is it about RHL that various people wouldn't
recommend running it in a production envornment?
I don't have a contrary view, so much as I'd like to
know what's specifically
On Wed, 27 Jun 2001, Tim Barnard wrote:
snip
...This is not the same in my book, since I don't care
to run RHL in any kind of production environment...
snip
What is it about RHL that various people wouldn't
recommend running it in a production envornment?
I don't have a contrary view,
...This is not the same in my book, since I don't care
to run RHL in any kind of production environment...
snip
What is it about RHL that various people wouldn't
recommend running it in a production envornment?
I don't have a contrary view, so much as I'd like to
know what's specifically
Alex Knight [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, 27 Jun 2001, Lamar Owen wrote:
On Wednesday 27 June 2001 16:15, Alex Knight wrote:
On Wed, 27 Jun 2001, Lamar Owen wrote:
Disagreed over here, with 4+ years of experience 24x7 on RHL since RHL
4.1.
This 4+ years 24/7 experience
Wow, I didn't realize I was going to open such a
big can of worms :-)
Thanks to everyone for putting in their "two-cents
worth."
All of the responses have definitely been helpful.
And I
agree with Adam, et al, this really doesn't belong
on this
list so lets end
this thread and move on.
Alex Knight [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
1) Distribution of Linux to have the largest number of out of the box
security holes. Check back and look at the security reports. Count them if
you insist.
And check for the number of them being Red Hat specific.
2) Most commercial software made
On Wed, Jun 27, 2001 at 05:03:33PM -0400, Lamar Owen wrote:
: I think most people that say they'd not run RHL either simply don't like
: Linux or just don't like Red Hat. Nothing different in this than the
: attitude of MySQL users who just simply don't like PostgreSQL. Or they've
: heard
Previous to version 7.1, RHL wasn't very secure by default. This is one
of
the most common complaints I hear. 7.1 can be made quite secure out of
the
box without any special config -- just leave the firewall config at the
default of 'HIGH' -- of course, I've now heard complaints that it is
Even though it may appear that your server is doing a lot, it's not
facing
the load of a highly scaled enterprise level e-commerce site, where
RedHat
just doesn't cut it.
That claim is bogus. Red Hat Linux is the number one linux by far in
enterprise deployments.
Well, Microsoft has
As long as it's a robust, managable, and open arhcitecture, I'm generally
agnostic as to technoliogies. That said, my red hat experience:
ran multiple java application servers and multiple oracle 8i db instances on
red hat 6.n (medium size 100-200 tables) with a moderately high
computationally
1) Distribution of Linux to have the largest number of out of the box
security holes. Check back and look at the security reports. Count them
if
you insist.
And check for the number of them being Red Hat specific.
I consider things like the portmapper being enabled by default Red Hat
Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Even though it may appear that your server is doing a lot, it's not facing
the load of a highly scaled enterprise level e-commerce site, where RedHat
just doesn't cut it.
That claim is bogus. Red Hat Linux is the number one linux by far in
None of them. Run FreeBSD. It's better.
Or, it will be, once the SMP code is improved. : )
steve
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
http://www.postgresql.org/search.mpl
To all who are fanning the flames -- this is not the place for prolonged
discussion on operating systems (nor sarcasm and zealous diatribes), is
it? -- please take it offline (please?)
thanks in advance
tjm
Imensis laboribus comparatur emditio: ac post moriendum est.
-Original
Steve Wolfe [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Previous to version 7.1, RHL wasn't very secure by default. This is one
of
the most common complaints I hear. 7.1 can be made quite secure out of
the
box without any special config -- just leave the firewall config at the
default of 'HIGH' -- of
Any examples available, please?
On all of creating, insertion, updateing, setting it to null?
From: Alex Pilosov [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Richard Church [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Blobs in PostgreSQL
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 08:43:33 -0400 (EDT)
SQL syntax is
Here is the table I have.
CREATE TABLE user_history (
id integer DEFAULT nextval('user_history_id_seq'::text) NOT
NULL,
userid integer NOT NULL,
ipaddr character(15) NOT NULL,
login_ts timestamp with time zone,
logout_ts timestamp with time zone,
On Wed, Jun 27, 2001 at 06:58:18PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
: My guess on this one is that Solaris is slower for PostgreSQL because
: process switching is _much_ heavier on Solaris than other OS's. This is
: because of the way they implemented processes in SVr4. They got quite
: heavy,
Yes, that was it. It should have been more obvious had I looked closer. A
second pair of eyes are always helpful. Still, I am a bit amazed that the
database allows this (trailing or leading spaces in the column names).
Thanks for you help!
Tom Veldhouse
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Original
28 matches
Mail list logo
