Re: [GENERAL] prelimiary performance comparison pgsql vs mysql

2005-03-15 Thread J. Greenlees
Mark Rae wrote: On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 12:51:03PM -0800, Jeff Davis wrote: Be careful assuming that. DB benchmarks are hard to do in a general sense. His results probably indicate a general trend, but you should test your application yourself to get a real result. His pattern of SQL queries might

Re: [GENERAL] PostgreSQL still for Linux only?

2005-03-08 Thread J. Greenlees
Uwe C. Schroeder wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Tuesday 08 March 2005 07:24 pm, Tope Akinniyi wrote: Hi, I am wondering at this display of extreme Linux mentality being displayed by the 'top bras' of the PostgreSQL community. And I ask, are we encouraging Windows use of

Re: [GENERAL] postgresql vs mysql performance comparison

2005-03-07 Thread J. Greenlees
Rick Schumeyer wrote: I'm interested in comparing the performance of postgresql and mysql on various combinations of user loads and database sizes. I have seen a few statements to the effect of mysql is faster for small, low use applications, but postgresql is better for bigger stuff. I would

Re: [GENERAL] Blob Fields

2005-03-04 Thread J. Greenlees
Alexandre da Siva wrote: Blobs is not Implemented on PostgreSQL, but I need to this field type on PosgreSQL databases, how I can to use this? I'm using delphi... ps: I readed PosgreSQL Manual and other lists and sites, but not get a answer for my specific problem

Re: [GENERAL] regular expressions in query

2005-02-13 Thread J. Greenlees
Lincoln Yeoh wrote: At 09:57 AM 2/13/2005 +, Russ Brown wrote: I've thought about things like this in the past, and a thought that occurred to me was to add a functional index on just_digits(telephone) to the table. Would this not allow the above query to use an index while searching? I

Re: [GENERAL] [pgsql-advocacy] MySQL worm attacks Windows servers

2005-02-06 Thread J. Greenlees
Jan Wieck wrote: On 1/30/2005 10:18 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: Dawid Kuroczko wrote: I think it is in good taste that when you find a bug/vulnerability/etc first you contact the author (in this case: core), leave them some time to fix the problem and then go on announcing it to the world. In

Re: [GENERAL] Unique Index

2005-01-20 Thread J. Greenlees
Tino Wildenhain wrote: Hi, Am Mittwoch, den 19.01.2005, 15:02 -0800 schrieb J. Greenlees: Roman Neuhauser wrote: # [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2005-01-20 01:35:32 +1100: i have a unique index on a table over multiple columns. If now one of the records has a null value in one of the indexed columns i can

Re: [GENERAL] what happened to the website?

2005-01-19 Thread J. Greenlees
Dick Davies wrote: http://www.postgresql.org looks bloody awful in firefox on debian, until I switch font (on the site) from 'normal' to 'large'. Anyone else seeing that? I'm sure it was fine a couple of weeks back. don't know about the fonts, but 15 minutes and still trying to load it. several

Re: [GENERAL] Unique Index

2005-01-19 Thread J. Greenlees
Roman Neuhauser wrote: # [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2005-01-20 01:35:32 +1100: i have a unique index on a table over multiple columns. If now one of the records has a null value in one of the indexed columns i can insert the same record multiple times. Is this a problem within postgres or expected?

Re: [GENERAL] ntfs for windows port rc5-2

2005-01-16 Thread J. Greenlees
Magnus Hagander wrote: rc5-2 msi will not install at all on a fat32 filesystem even without initialising the database. Really? The code for checking the filesystem type is only executed if you chose to initdb, so I really don't see this happening. Exactly what message do you get? Log in the temp

Re: [GENERAL] ntfs for windows port rc5-2

2005-01-16 Thread J. Greenlees
Magnus Hagander wrote: rc5-2 msi will not install at all on a fat32 filesystem even without initialising the database. Really? The code for checking the filesystem type is only executed if you chose to initdb, so I really don't see this happening. Exactly what message do you get? Log in the

Re: [GENERAL] ntfs for windows port rc5-2

2005-01-14 Thread J. Greenlees
Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: On Fri, Jan 14, 2005 at 08:39:28AM -0800, J. Greenlees wrote: why? since an app that I'm working on would be useless for 60% of potential clients, using posgresql with the requirement for ms' corrupted ntfs means postgresql isn't going to work for it. I think what

Re: [GENERAL] ntfs for windows port rc5-2

2005-01-14 Thread J. Greenlees
Frank D. Engel, Jr. wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 You may wish to consider a different database for your project. SQLite may be a better choice, for example, depending on the project's specific needs (www.sqlite.org). Win95/98/ME is poor technology, no matter how many

[GENERAL] ntfs for windows port rc5-2

2005-01-14 Thread J. Greenlees
why? since an app that I'm working on would be useless for 60% of potential clients, using posgresql with the requirement for ms' corrupted ntfs means postgresql isn't going to work for it. since ms does not include a compiler, and the source for 8.0 won't cross compile from linux. ( gcc 3.3.0