Hello.
I would like to run 2
instances of postgresql with 2 different data-directories: dir-a en
dir-b.
Looking trough the archives I
came to the next setup:
I created this 2 different
directories and 2 users each with a different PGDATA(dir-a and dir-b) in
How are you connecting to Postgres?
Note that you’ll always need to give
the port 5433 to connect to the second instance in any tool you use (psql,
pg_dump, other management utilities etc), otherwise you’ll always connect
to the “default” instance on 5432.
Andy
From: [
The problem you’ve got is that there’ll
always be 2 configurations – one for your “default” instance
and one for your 5433 instance.
I believe (I could be wrong here), that
postgresql.conf is just for the server side – it’s the client tools
you’re connecting with, so they need to know w
Good afternoon.
I'm not sure if this is the correct list, so please forgive me if it's not.
I was wondering if there's a mechanism (or if not, a workaround) to
obfuscate server code (PL/PgSQL), a la Oracle's PL/SQL Wrap Utility:
http://download-west.oracle.com/docs/cd/B10501_01/appdev.920/a9662
On 7/4/06, Rodrigo De Leon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I was wondering if there's a mechanism (or if not, a workaround) to
obfuscate server code (PL/PgSQL), a la Oracle's PL/SQL Wrap Utility:
No, there is no such utility for PostgreSQL. And, even if there were,
it wouldn't actually stop someone
On 7/4/06, Jonah H. Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
No, there is no such utility for PostgreSQL. And, even if there were,
it wouldn't actually stop someone from reverse engineering it quite
easily as the source code to PL/pgSQL itself is readily available.
I see. Thanks for the reply, both t
Title: [ADMIN] space not reclaimed after repeated full vacuums
Hi all:
I'm running Pgsql 7.4.6 on Red Hat Enterprise Linux 3.0 (UR4 and UR6).
My question/problem is around how much disk space PostgreSQL uses when tables are grown (by a restore) and then shrunk down again (delete + vacuum --f
Title: RE: [ADMIN] space not reclaimed after repeated full vacuums
> I left this running over the weekend, and was surprised to
> find the script still running in it's 25th iteration this
> morning, with basically no rows left in any of the non-static tables.
>
> The interesting thing was t
On 7/4/06, Jonah H. Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 7/4/06, Rodrigo De Leon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> I was wondering if there's a mechanism (or if not, a workaround) to> obfuscate server code (PL/PgSQL), a la Oracle's PL/SQL Wrap Utility:
No, there is no such utility for PostgreSQL. And, e
On 7/4/06, Aaron Bono <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I don't see how PostgreSQL being open source will stop obfuscation of the
PL/pgSQL from being possible.
You're missing the whole point. Oracle doesn't obfuscate the code,
they compile it into bytecode and then spit the bytecode back out as a
tex
On 7/4/06, Jonah H. Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 7/4/06, Aaron Bono <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I don't see how PostgreSQL being open source will stop obfuscation of the
> PL/pgSQL from being possible.
Oh, and I forgot to add, obfuscation is lame and doesn't really work.
Anyone with a
On Tuesday 04 July 2006 15:53, Jonah H. Harris wrote:
> On 7/4/06, Jonah H. Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 7/4/06, Aaron Bono <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > I don't see how PostgreSQL being open source will stop obfuscation of
> > > the PL/pgSQL from being possible.
>
> Oh, and I forgot
On 7/4/06, Joshua D. Drake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I have more then once been in an environment where, "Oh we just "sampled" the
function from *xyz*".
That's precisely the reason I was asking, because my colleagues and I
had that same experience with Oracle packages when doing consulting
wor
"Rodrigo De Leon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I would be quite a bonus to have equivalent functionality in PG.
Write your functions in C and give them precompiled libraries.
Yes, also theoretically decompilable, but plenty hard ... plus
they have to come back to you for an update on every major
On Tuesday 04 July 2006 18:51, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Rodrigo De Leon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I would be quite a bonus to have equivalent functionality in PG.
>
> Write your functions in C and give them precompiled libraries.
> Yes, also theoretically decompilable, but plenty hard ... plus
> t
15 matches
Mail list logo
