[ADMIN] One machine connects, the other doesn't???
Hi I have postgresql 7.2.2-1 on "BACKEND". If I use "Shop"(192.168.24.5) I can connect using the command: psql mydatabase -h BACKEND -U ownerofmydatabase I am asked for the password and upon giving it all is well. BUT. If I use "Office"(192.168.24.4) and I try the same thing: psql mydatabase -h BACKEND -U ownerofmydatabase I get: psql: FATAL 1: No pg_hba.conf entry for host 192.168.24.4, user ownerofmydatabase, database mydatabase My pg_hba.conf file has two lines local all trust host all 192.168.24.0 255.255.255.0 password Any ideas??? Jeff Roberts ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html
[ADMIN] Forcing pg_dump NOT to use "INSERT..."
Hi, On Red Hat 9, when I run the pg_dump command, it uses the "INSERT " dump format. I thought it only did that if you used the --inserts option. How do I force it NOT to use that format? Regards, David. ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
Re: [ADMIN] One machine connects, the other doesn't???
> Hi > > I have postgresql 7.2.2-1 on "BACKEND". Although its not answer to your problem , but you shud *really* upgrade your PostgreSQL version to 7.2.4 version some serious bugs were fixed relating to possible data loss. Regards Mallah. > > If I use "Shop"(192.168.24.5) I can connect using the command: > > psql mydatabase -h BACKEND -U ownerofmydatabase > > I am asked for the password and upon giving it all is well. > > BUT. > > If I use "Office"(192.168.24.4) and I try the same thing: > > psql mydatabase -h BACKEND -U ownerofmydatabase > > I get: > > psql: FATAL 1: No pg_hba.conf entry for host 192.168.24.4, user > ownerofmydatabase, database mydatabase > > My pg_hba.conf file has two lines > > local all trust > host all 192.168.24.0 255.255.255.0 password > > Any ideas??? > > Jeff Roberts > > > ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: Have > you > checked our extensive FAQ? > > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html - Over 1,00,000 exporters are waiting for your order! Click below to get in touch with leading Indian exporters listed in the premier trade directory Exporters Yellow Pages. http://www.trade-india.com/dyn/gdh/eyp/ ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html
Re: [ADMIN] One machine connects, the other doesn't???
Try using the IP instead of backend. Also, try a ping BACKEND from the second machine, see what it will tell you. Bye -- Valentin Militaru Inginer de sistem ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
Re: [ADMIN] Forcing pg_dump NOT to use "INSERT..."
Hi, Yes that's right But You can avoid it by adding '-s, --schema-only' it will copy only structure without data Regards, Andrzej Schulz Galileo-Selidor -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David F. Skoll Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2003 3:42 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [ADMIN] Forcing pg_dump NOT to use "INSERT..." Hi, On Red Hat 9, when I run the pg_dump command, it uses the "INSERT " dump format. I thought it only did that if you used the --inserts option. How do I force it NOT to use that format? Regards, David. ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [ADMIN] One machine connects, the other doesn't???
Jeff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I get: > psql: FATAL 1: No pg_hba.conf entry for host 192.168.24.4, user > ownerofmydatabase, database mydatabase > My pg_hba.conf file has two lines > local all trust > host all 192.168.24.0 255.255.255.0 password Hm. Are you sure you are looking at the right pg_hba.conf file? Did you SIGHUP the postmaster after your latest change to pg_hba.conf? Try looking in the postmaster log to see if it emits any complaints about syntax problems in pg_hba.conf when you SIGHUP it and/or connect. regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend
Re: [ADMIN] Forcing pg_dump NOT to use "INSERT..."
"David F. Skoll" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Red Hat 9, when I run the pg_dump command, it uses the > "INSERT " dump format. I thought it only did that if you used the > --inserts option. How do I force it NOT to use that format? This is extremely hard to believe. I can see no way that pg_dump will do that unless you explicitly ask for it (-d or -D switch, or one of the long variants of same). regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
[ADMIN] Microsoft access verses postgresql
I've got a client who is following my suggestion that they replace a set of excel spreadsheets with a database solution. They are looking at two proposals, postgresql solution or an Access solution. The requirements will include vpn connectivity from one site to another. It appears they will be going with the Access solution. I've got concerns regarding this based on research I've done that seems to indicate that Access, when used in a multi-user solution is easily corrupted. Does anyone have any knowledge/experience with such issues? -- Until later, Geoffrey [EMAIL PROTECTED] Building secure systems inspite of Microsoft ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [ADMIN] Microsoft access verses postgresql
I have been working on an in-house software package for over 3 years now. I started out using an Access database but once we put more users on it the database began corrupting frequently. We replaced hardware and the problem would go away for a bit but would soon return. We switched to SQL Server (using the eval) but we decided to try switching to PostgreSQL before the 120 eval was up. We're still working on the MSSQL -> PostgreSQL switch but once we got off of Access everything went good - no more corruptions :) David Green Sage Automation, Inc. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Geoffrey Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2003 11:46 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [ADMIN] Microsoft access verses postgresql I've got a client who is following my suggestion that they replace a set of excel spreadsheets with a database solution. They are looking at two proposals, postgresql solution or an Access solution. The requirements will include vpn connectivity from one site to another. It appears they will be going with the Access solution. I've got concerns regarding this based on research I've done that seems to indicate that Access, when used in a multi-user solution is easily corrupted. Does anyone have any knowledge/experience with such issues? -- Until later, Geoffrey [EMAIL PROTECTED] Building secure systems inspite of Microsoft ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend
Re: [ADMIN] Microsoft access verses postgresql
Not only will you have performance and corruption issues, you'll also have problems with the lock file. And security is a pain to manage. We have replaced all of our multi-user Access databases with PostgreSQL. Chuck > -Original Message- > From: Geoffrey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2003 10:46 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [ADMIN] Microsoft access verses postgresql > > > I've got a client who is following my suggestion that they > replace a set > of excel spreadsheets with a database solution. They are > looking at two > proposals, postgresql solution or an Access solution. The > requirements > will include vpn connectivity from one site to another. It > appears they > will be going with the Access solution. I've got concerns regarding > this based on research I've done that seems to indicate that Access, > when used in a multi-user solution is easily corrupted. Does anyone > have any knowledge/experience with such issues? > > -- > Until later, Geoffrey [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Building secure systems inspite of Microsoft > > > ---(end of > broadcast)--- > TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to [EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: [ADMIN] One machine connects, the other doesn't???
Thanks Mallah First I'll check to make sure it won't break my application and then I'll have to learn how to back up my database and then perhaps I'll start looking for the way to do an upgrade. Which means I'll be hanging around for a while ;-) Jeff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi I have postgresql 7.2.2-1 on "BACKEND". Although its not answer to your problem , but you shud *really* upgrade your PostgreSQL version to 7.2.4 version some serious bugs were fixed relating to possible data loss. Regards Mallah. If I use "Shop"(192.168.24.5) I can connect using the command: psql mydatabase -h BACKEND -U ownerofmydatabase I am asked for the password and upon giving it all is well. BUT. If I use "Office"(192.168.24.4) and I try the same thing: psql mydatabase -h BACKEND -U ownerofmydatabase I get: psql: FATAL 1: No pg_hba.conf entry for host 192.168.24.4, user ownerofmydatabase, database mydatabase My pg_hba.conf file has two lines local all trust host all 192.168.24.0 255.255.255.0 password Any ideas??? Jeff Roberts ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html - Over 1,00,000 exporters are waiting for your order! Click below to get in touch with leading Indian exporters listed in the premier trade directory Exporters Yellow Pages. http://www.trade-india.com/dyn/gdh/eyp/ ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend
[ADMIN] delete postmaster.pid on windows xp home edition before startup postmaster
i install postmaster as service on windows xp home edition. some time it fail to start due to the existing postmaster.pid. how can i delete the file before start postmaster that's start automatically when machine startup. or the way i think is wrong, i should do another thing else? thanks __ Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
[ADMIN] PGSQL Mailing List Reply-To field
Hi, I'm currently subscribed to pgsql-general and wheneven every I hit reply, I keep forgetting to reply-to-all so that my mail client includes a cc to the pgsql-general list. I keep doing this because I keep forgetting the Reply-To field isn't set to the pgsql- mailing list. I was wondering if anyone else thought it might be a good idea (or not) to use this ? Cheers, Rob ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
Re: [ADMIN] One machine connects, the other doesn't???
Thanks Valentin Ping BACKEND worked and -U 192.168.24.8 returned the same result but Tom gave me a suggestion that solved it, I was editing the wrong pg_hba.conf file. :-( Jeff Valentin Militaru wrote: Try using the IP instead of backend. Also, try a ping BACKEND from the second machine, see what it will tell you. Bye ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [ADMIN] Microsoft access verses postgresql
Geoffrey wrote: I've got a client who is following my suggestion that they replace a set of excel spreadsheets with a database solution. They are looking at two proposals, postgresql solution or an Access solution. The requirements will include vpn connectivity from one site to another. It appears they will be going with the Access solution. I've got concerns regarding this based on research I've done that seems to indicate that Access, when used in a multi-user solution is easily corrupted. Does anyone have any knowledge/experience with such issues? My experience: Access, like any desktop-based database, is subject to data corruption in multi-user environments. Pretty easy to picture when every machine keeps chunks of data in their local memory, has to write back to the network and then somehow push the updates to the other clients. You *can* avoid data corruption using very strict locks -- but you can't use Access' built-in table/row locking as those functions also suffer from the same multi-user synchronization problem. What you can do is to write your own locking functions based on file handle access. Make a temp dir on a network and everytime you want to update/insert, attempt to create a file based on the table/record (e.g. CUSTOMERS-0 for inserts, CUSTOMERS-1000 for specific records) -- a valid file handle would then mean you have a lock. For the most part, you can avoid data corruption if you bypass the built-in locking functions but you will still have to periodically take down the system during production hours for reindexing when even these measures fail. ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend
Re: [ADMIN] One machine connects, the other doesn't???
Thanks Tom! I was editing /usr/local/pgsql/data/pg_hba.conf when I should have been editing /var/lib/pgsql/data/pg_hba.conf Now everything works. Jeff Tom Lane wrote: Jeff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: I get: psql: FATAL 1: No pg_hba.conf entry for host 192.168.24.4, user ownerofmydatabase, database mydatabase My pg_hba.conf file has two lines local all trust host all 192.168.24.0 255.255.255.0 password Hm. Are you sure you are looking at the right pg_hba.conf file? Did you SIGHUP the postmaster after your latest change to pg_hba.conf? Try looking in the postmaster log to see if it emits any complaints about syntax problems in pg_hba.conf when you SIGHUP it and/or connect. regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
Re: [ADMIN] Microsoft access verses postgresql
I've got a client who is following my suggestion that they replace a set of excel spreadsheets with a database solution. They are looking at two proposals, postgresql solution or an Access solution. The requirements will include vpn connectivity from one site to another. It appears they will be going with the Access solution. I've got concerns regarding this based on research I've done that seems to indicate that Access, when used in a multi-user solution is easily corrupted. Does anyone have any knowledge/experience with such issues? As far as I am concerned, Access is a bad joice if the data needs to be accessed from more than one application at the same time. But if Excel worked well enough and only one person is working with the data, then Access might do just well. Kaarel ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [ADMIN] PGSQL Mailing List Reply-To field
On Tue, Nov 04, 2003 at 15:27:23 +, Rob Fielding <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > I'm currently subscribed to pgsql-general and wheneven every I hit > reply, I keep forgetting to reply-to-all so that my mail client includes > a cc to the pgsql-general list. > > I keep doing this because I keep forgetting the Reply-To field isn't set > to the pgsql- mailing list. > > I was wondering if anyone else thought it might be a good idea (or not) > to use this ? Its not. You should probably just get used to doing reply to all. If you want to reply just to the sender you can use reply to sender on these lists but will have to go through some contortions on your broken lists. I usually filter out reply-to headers on lists that mung them so as not to break reply to sender on my client. ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[ADMIN] data format problem for upgrede from 7.1->7.3
Hi: I just upgraded from 7.1->7.3, but did not take a data back up. Now when i try to start the posrGreSQL server I get the message: An old version of the database format was found.\nYou need to upgrade the data format before using PostgreSQL.\nSee (Your System's documentation directory)/postgresql-7.3/README.rpm-dist for more information. There is not much info on format change in the Docs. Any idea what might be the resolution here? Thanks, Gautam ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html
Re: [ADMIN] data format problem for upgrede from 7.1->7.3
Gautam Saha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Any idea what might be the resolution here? Put back your 7.1 executables and make a pg_dumpall run before you upgrade. Then upgrade, initdb, reload the dump. regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
[ADMIN] 7.3.5
Will there be a 7.3.5 version released, containing relevant patches, before the release of the 7.4 version? Thanks in advance Regards Donald Fraser
Re: [ADMIN] 7.3.5
On Tue, Nov 04, 2003 at 23:16:15 -, Donald Fraser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Will there be a 7.3.5 version released, containing relevant patches, before the > release of the 7.4 version? That seems unlikely. It seems likely that there will be such a release, but most likely it will be after the 7.4 release. You can get a copy of 7.3 from CVS. I don't remember the appropiate tag name, but it was posted on one of the lists in the last couple of days. ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to [EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: [ADMIN] 7.3.5
Bruno Wolff III <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Tue, Nov 04, 2003 at 23:16:15 -, > Donald Fraser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Will there be a 7.3.5 version released, containing relevant patches, before the >> release of the 7.4 version? > That seems unlikely. It seems likely that there will be such a release, but > most likely it will be after the 7.4 release. Yes. I'd expect we'd wait till a little while after 7.4, since often interesting bugs are first reported just after a release --- there may be things we learn that ought to be back-patched into 7.3.5. There is not currently anything in the 7.3 branch that looks like an immediate release forcer to me. (I posted a summary of recent 7.3 commit messages to pgsql-hackers a couple days ago, if you're interested.) > You can get a copy of 7.3 from CVS. I don't remember the appropiate tag > name, but it was posted on one of the lists in the last couple of days. The tip of the REL7_3_STABLE branch is the closest present approximation to what 7.3.5 might look like. regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
Re: [ADMIN] Microsoft access verses postgresql
I have many years experience with several database products: Foxbase,
FoxPro, MS SQL, Access, Postgresql, AS400 DB2. Compared to any of the
above Access is a toy. Case in point; in my office we have a product
which is "multi-user" based upon Access. When the users, there are
only four of them, start pumping data into the database all at once,
the product fails. We then contact the vendor then replies with a
TechNet article from M$ which explains that Access should not be used
as a multi-user database.
Also, take note many many projects start as just a simple little job
and then take on a life of their own.
Oh what about security and user management. And what about backups.
Who is going to hang around until all the users are finished to backup
the database?
Considering Postgresql is free and actually works. There is no
decision.
good luck
kd
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ("Haron, Charles") wrote in message news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> Not only will you have performance and corruption issues, you'll also have
> problems with the lock file. And security is a pain to manage. We have
> replaced all of our multi-user Access databases with PostgreSQL.
>
> Chuck
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Geoffrey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2003 10:46 AM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: [ADMIN] Microsoft access verses postgresql
> >
> >
> > I've got a client who is following my suggestion that they
> > replace a set
> > of excel spreadsheets with a database solution. They are
> > looking at two
> > proposals, postgresql solution or an Access solution. The
> > requirements
> > will include vpn connectivity from one site to another. It
> > appears they
> > will be going with the Access solution. I've got concerns regarding
> > this based on research I've done that seems to indicate that Access,
> > when used in a multi-user solution is easily corrupted. Does anyone
> > have any knowledge/experience with such issues?
> >
> > --
> > Until later, Geoffrey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > Building secure systems inspite of Microsoft
> >
> >
> > ---(end of
> > broadcast)---
> > TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
>
> ---(end of broadcast)---
> TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
> (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to [EMAIL PROTECTED])
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your
joining column's datatypes do not match
Re: [ADMIN] Microsoft access verses postgresql
On Tue, 2003-11-04 at 12:46, Geoffrey wrote: > I've got a client who is following my suggestion that they replace a set > of excel spreadsheets with a database solution. They are looking at two > proposals, postgresql solution or an Access solution. The requirements > will include vpn connectivity from one site to another. It appears they > will be going with the Access solution. I've got concerns regarding > this based on research I've done that seems to indicate that Access, > when used in a multi-user solution is easily corrupted. Does anyone > have any knowledge/experience with such issues? Um, use both?? We've been having some success using Access front ends with postgresql back ends. Takes away the data corruption/scalability issues, but keeps the strength of the Access reporting and data entry interfaces. -- .Michelle --- Michelle Murrain [EMAIL PROTECTED] Database Designs Associates, Inc. Boston 617.889.0929 Amherst 413.253.2874 Cell 413.222.6350 www.dbdes.com AIM:pearlbear0 ICQ:129250575 "Our capacity to make peace with another person and with the world depends very much on our capacity to make peace with ourselves." -- Thich Nhat Hanh ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
Re: [ADMIN] Microsoft access verses postgresql
Michelle Murrain wrote: On Tue, 2003-11-04 at 12:46, Geoffrey wrote: I've got a client who is following my suggestion that they replace a set of excel spreadsheets with a database solution. They are looking at two proposals, postgresql solution or an Access solution. The requirements will include vpn connectivity from one site to another. It appears they will be going with the Access solution. I've got concerns regarding this based on research I've done that seems to indicate that Access, when used in a multi-user solution is easily corrupted. Does anyone have any knowledge/experience with such issues? Um, use both?? We've been having some success using Access front ends with postgresql back ends. Takes away the data corruption/scalability issues, but keeps the strength of the Access reporting and data entry interfaces. Okay, so how do you approach this? Access front end will talk to postgresql? Pointers to any docs would be appreciated. -- Until later, Geoffrey [EMAIL PROTECTED] Building secure systems inspite of Microsoft ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to [EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: [ADMIN] Microsoft access verses postgresql
Kaarel wrote: I've got a client who is following my suggestion that they replace a set of excel spreadsheets with a database solution. They are looking at two proposals, postgresql solution or an Access solution. The requirements will include vpn connectivity from one site to another. It appears they will be going with the Access solution. I've got concerns regarding this based on research I've done that seems to indicate that Access, when used in a multi-user solution is easily corrupted. Does anyone have any knowledge/experience with such issues? As far as I am concerned, Access is a bad joice if the data needs to be accessed from more than one application at the same time. But if Excel worked well enough and only one person is working with the data, then Access might do just well. Multiple people were attempting to access the excel spreadsheets. Their solution was for any person who modifies the spreadsheet was to copy it to the other 4 computers. Yes, that's correct. I suggested a db solution from the beginning, but they didn't want to spend the $$$, so I suggested placing the excel spreadsheets on a single file server, thus only one person could access a spreadsheet at one time and no more copying files across their network. -- Until later, Geoffrey [EMAIL PROTECTED] Building secure systems inspite of Microsoft ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to [EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: [ADMIN] Microsoft access verses postgresql
On Tue, 2003-11-04 at 21:39, Geoffrey wrote: > Okay, so how do you approach this? Access front end will talk to > postgresql? Pointers to any docs would be appreciated. Access front end talks with Postgresql via ODBC. Can be a little flakey at times, but it works well in my experience, although it does depend some on the complexity you need. There are a couple of different docs at: http://techdocs.postgresql.org/ - one good one on the step by step under "Technical Guides". -- .Michelle --- Michelle Murrain [EMAIL PROTECTED] Database Designs Associates, Inc. Boston 617.889.0929 Amherst 413.253.2874 Cell 413.222.6350 www.dbdes.com AIM:pearlbear0 ICQ:129250575 "Our capacity to make peace with another person and with the world depends very much on our capacity to make peace with ourselves." -- Thich Nhat Hanh ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html
