If you are looking for the name of the package providing the postgres
library, it will probably change over the distros; under Debian, you're
probably looking for libpq5 for the library itself, but I don't know the
name of the package containing debugging symbols for this one.
Depending on your de
[mailto:michael.paqu...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 08, 2016 9:21 AM
To: Gadamsetty, Kiran
Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org; Kumar, Sunil(RM engineering)
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Linux equivalent library for "postgres.lib" from Windows
On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 2:28 PM, Gadamsetty, Kiran
wro
John R Pierce wrote:
>> I am new to the product and in windows “postgres.lib” provides certain
>> functions which we are
>> using in windows for creating extensions.
>>
>> Now I am porting the project to Linux and there no straight library with
>> this name in Linux
>> binaries packages.
>>
>>
On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 1:29 PM, John R Pierce wrote:
> I am not sure what this postgres.lib is, what are the functions you're using
> ?
It contains references to all the exposed functions of the backend on
Windows. Using something like dumpbin /exports postgres.lib would show
exactly that if I re
On 11/7/2016 7:51 PM, Michael Paquier wrote:
There is no need to go down to this level of details perhaps? You
could just use the PGXS infrastructure to guess it for you.
+1 I forgot to mention PGXS, that provides a portable method of
building server-side extensions.
See https://www.post
On 11/6/2016 9:28 PM, Gadamsetty, Kiran wrote:
I am new to the product and in windows “postgres.lib” provides certain
functions which we are using in windows for creating extensions.
Now I am porting the project to Linux and there no straight library
with this name in Linux binaries packages
On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 2:28 PM, Gadamsetty, Kiran
wrote:
> I am new to the product and in windows “postgres.lib” provides certain
> functions which we are using in windows for creating extensions.
>
> Now I am porting the project to Linux and there no straight library with
> this name in Linux bin
Hi,
I am new to the product and in windows "postgres.lib" provides certain
functions which we are using in windows for creating extensions.
Now I am porting the project to Linux and there no straight library with this
name in Linux binaries packages.
Can someone please advise the equivalent lib
Yes,it is locale problem.
I do some more testing,and find that in my DB locale which is
zh_CN.UTF-8,the indexes on FreeBSD slave can works if the indexed data is
lower case ascii,it can't find data contain upper case.
Explicit set the column collate to "C" can solve the problem.
I will recreate al
Adrian Klaver writes:
> On 08/20/2014 07:53 AM, Jov wrote:
>> I setup a PG 9.3.5 master on CentOS 6 x86_64,and 2 screaming replicaton
>> slaves,one on CentOS6 x86_64,the other on FreeBSD 10 amd64.
>> The replication work fine for a week,But today I find a problem on sql
>> running on FreeBSD:simpl
On 08/20/2014 07:53 AM, Jov wrote:
I setup a PG 9.3.5 master on CentOS 6 x86_64,and 2 screaming replicaton
slaves,one on CentOS6 x86_64,the other on FreeBSD 10 amd64.
The replication work fine for a week,But today I find a problem on sql
running on FreeBSD:simple sql use index do not return resul
I setup a PG 9.3.5 master on CentOS 6 x86_64,and 2 screaming replicaton
slaves,one on CentOS6 x86_64,the other on FreeBSD 10 amd64.
The replication work fine for a week,But today I find a problem on sql
running on FreeBSD:simple sql use index do not return result.If I disable
the index ,use seqscan
On Fri, 11 Apr 2014 17:15:28 +0300
Achilleas Mantzios wrote:
> pl/java has nothing to do with this. The argument against using
> packages/ports for postgresql upgrades, is that upgrades in general
> involve :
> - reading HISTORY thoroughly and understanding every bit of it,
> especially the migrat
On 11/04/2014 15:05, Alban Hertroys wrote:
Although it is getting a bit specific, would you care to elaborate why you would advice strongly against using ports or packages for Postgres on FreeBSD? Because that’s a rather strong statement
you’re making and so far the only argument I’ve seen is tha
On Fri, 11 Apr 2014 09:16:04 -0400
Steve Litt wrote:
> Curious: Why not consider OpenBSD also?
Or NetBSD.
--
D'Arcy J.M. Cain | Democracy is three wolves
http://www.druid.net/darcy/| and a sheep voting on
+1 416 788 2246 (DoD#0082)(eNTP) | what's for dinner
On Fri, 11 Apr 2014 14:05:43 +0200
Alban Hertroys wrote:
> My advice to the OP:
>
> Install FreeBSD on a system to play around with, get a feel for how
> it works and whether you like it or not. See how it performs with
> Postgres on different file-systems; UFS2 or ZFS - UFS is the faster
> of t
On 11 Apr 2014, at 12:39, Achilleas Mantzios
wrote:
I moved this bit of the conversation up as it’s relevant to the OP:
> On 11/04/2014 13:05, Alban Hertroys wrote:
>> On 11 Apr 2014, at 8:04, Achilleas Mantzios
>> wrote:
>>> I don't mean to scare the OP, but FreeBSD is not for everyone.
>>
On 11/04/2014 13:05, Alban Hertroys wrote:
On 11 Apr 2014, at 8:04, Achilleas Mantzios
wrote:
Basically it goes beyond what ppl would describe as OS holly wars.
If one chooses to go by FreeBSD, then he better be prepared to handle the
burden, both the part that is
imposed by the OS administr
On 11 Apr 2014, at 8:04, Achilleas Mantzios
wrote:
> Basically it goes beyond what ppl would describe as OS holly wars.
> If one chooses to go by FreeBSD, then he better be prepared to handle the
> burden, both the part that is
> imposed by the OS administration itself, as well as the part that
Basically it goes beyond what ppl would describe as OS holly wars.
If one chooses to go by FreeBSD, then he better be prepared to handle the
burden, both the part that is
imposed by the OS administration itself, as well as the part that is a side
effect of the different base system.
Example of
On 04/10/14 17:25, Christofer C. Bell wrote:
I'm not wanting to get after anyone here, but I want it on the record
that I am not the source of the above quote discouraging the use of
Ubuntu in a server role. That would be Bruce Momjian. While Bruce is
entitled to his opinion, it's not one I agre
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 3:36 PM, François Beausoleil
wrote:
>
> Le 2014-04-09 à 16:20, Bruce Momjian a écrit :
>
> On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 10:02:07AM -0500, Christofer C. Bell wrote:
>
> This highlights a more fundamental problem of the difference between a
> workstation-based on OS like Ubuntu and
On 4 April 2014 11:03, François Beausoleil wrote:
> Hi all!
>
> Does PG perform that much better on FreeBSD? I have some performance issues
> on a Ubuntu 12.04 which I'd like to resolve. iowait varies a lot, between 5
> and 50%. Does FreeBSD better schedule I/O, which could alleviate some of the
On Wednesday, April 09, 2014 09:02:02 PM Brent Wood wrote:
> Given the likely respective numbers of each OS actually out there, I'd
> suggests BSD is very over-represented in the high uptime list which is
> suggestive.
Suggestive of ... sysadmins who don't do kernel updates?
--
Sent via pgsql-
c: Christofer C. Bell; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Linux vs FreeBSD
Le 2014-04-09 ? 16:20, Bruce Momjian a ?crit :
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 10:02:07AM -0500, Christofer C. Bell wrote:
This highlights a more fundamental problem of the difference between a
workstation-based on
On 04/09/14 14:46, Scott Marlowe wrote:
>
> I'm not deploying any new distro version that soon. :) I know folks
> just putting 12.04 into prod to replace etch and lenny. :)
You can easily get the 3.11.0 kernel on 12.04.4 LTS by installing
the linux-generic-lts-saucy package. IIRC, the fix for th
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 2:56 PM, Steve Atkins wrote:
>
> On Apr 9, 2014, at 1:33 PM, Scott Marlowe wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 9:02 AM, Christofer C. Bell
>> wrote:
>>> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 11:03 PM, François Beausoleil
>>> wrote:
Hi all!
Does PG perform that much better
On Apr 9, 2014, at 1:33 PM, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 9:02 AM, Christofer C. Bell
> wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 11:03 PM, François Beausoleil
>> wrote:
>>> Hi all!
>>>
>>> Does PG perform that much better on FreeBSD? I have some performance issues
>>> on a Ubuntu 12.
Le 2014-04-09 à 16:20, Bruce Momjian a écrit :
> On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 10:02:07AM -0500, Christofer C. Bell wrote:
>
> This highlights a more fundamental problem of the difference between a
> workstation-based on OS like Ubuntu and a server-based one like Debian
> or FreeBSD. I know Ubuntu ha
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 9:02 AM, Christofer C. Bell
wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 11:03 PM, François Beausoleil
> wrote:
>> Hi all!
>>
>> Does PG perform that much better on FreeBSD? I have some performance issues
>> on a Ubuntu 12.04 which I'd like to resolve. iowait varies a lot, between 5
>
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 10:02:07AM -0500, Christofer C. Bell wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 11:03 PM, François Beausoleil
> wrote:
> > Hi all!
> >
> > Does PG perform that much better on FreeBSD? I have some performance issues
> > on a Ubuntu 12.04 which I'd like to resolve. iowait varies a lot,
On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 11:03 PM, François Beausoleil
wrote:
> Hi all!
>
> Does PG perform that much better on FreeBSD? I have some performance issues
> on a Ubuntu 12.04 which I'd like to resolve. iowait varies a lot, between 5
> and 50%. Does FreeBSD better schedule I/O, which could alleviate s
On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 12:03 AM, François Beausoleil
wrote:
> Our workload is lots of data import, followed by many queries to summarize
> (daily and weekly reports). Our main table is a wide table that represents
> Twitter and Facebook interactions. Most of our reports work on a week's worth
>
As a side note, when we migrated the exact same pgsql 8.3 system from linux
kernel 2.6 to 3.6,
we experienced an almost dramatic slowdown by 6 times.
Linux Kernel's were known to have issues around those dates, i recall.
We had to set synchronous_commit to off, this gave a huge boost ,
but this w
Le 2014-04-04 à 08:11, Ray Stell a écrit :
>
> On Apr 4, 2014, at 12:03 AM, François Beausoleil wrote:
>
>> I have some performance issues on a Ubuntu 12.04 which I'd like to resolve.
>> iowait varies a lot, between 5 and 50%.
>
> Is the SAN dedicated to this app? I wonder if the i/o, if n
On Apr 4, 2014, at 12:03 AM, François Beausoleil wrote:
> I have some performance issues on a Ubuntu 12.04 which I'd like to resolve.
> iowait varies a lot, between 5 and 50%.
Is the SAN dedicated to this app? I wonder if the i/o, if not related to your
app, is being pressed by some other s
FreeBSD is OK if you are experienced. As a system it requires much more
maturity by the admin
than lets say Ubuntu which is targeted at a larger user base.
I'd say, explore your other Linux options first, since you already have
experience with Linux.
FreeBSD requires a much bigger learning curve
On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 9:33 AM, François Beausoleil wrote:
> Hi all!
>
> Does PG perform that much better on FreeBSD? I have some performance
> issues on a Ubuntu 12.04 which I'd like to resolve. iowait varies a lot,
> between 5 and 50%. Does FreeBSD better schedule I/O, which could alleviate
> so
On 4/3/2014 9:03 PM, François Beausoleil wrote:
The host is a dedicated hardware machine at online.fr: 128 GB RAM, 2 x 3TB disk
in RAID 1 configuration.
just a passing comment...
3TB disks are 7200rpm and suitable for nearline bulk storage (or desktop
use), not high performance database rand
Hi all!
Does PG perform that much better on FreeBSD? I have some performance issues on
a Ubuntu 12.04 which I'd like to resolve. iowait varies a lot, between 5 and
50%. Does FreeBSD better schedule I/O, which could alleviate some of the
issues, or not at all? I have no experience administering
On 03/17/2014 04:21 AM, basti wrote:
uname -a
Linux h2085616 3.2.0-3-amd64 #1 SMP Mon Jul 23 02:45:17 UTC 2012 x86_64
GNU/Linux
At any time there are not more than 20-30 Connections at once.
Swap is disabled.
free -m
total used free sharedbuffers cached
Mem
basti wrote:
>>> Since a few days we had problems with the Linux OOM-Killer.
>>> Some simple query that normally take around 6-7 minutes now takes 5 hours.
>>> We did not change any configuration values the last days.
>>>
>>> First of all I have set
>>>
>>> vm.overcommit_memory=2
>>> vm.overcommit_
On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 12:21:30PM +0100, basti wrote:
> uname -a
> Linux h2085616 3.2.0-3-amd64 #1 SMP Mon Jul 23 02:45:17 UTC 2012 x86_64
> GNU/Linux
>
> At any time there are not more than 20-30 Connections at once.
>
> Swap is disabled.
> free -m
> total used free
uname -a
Linux h2085616 3.2.0-3-amd64 #1 SMP Mon Jul 23 02:45:17 UTC 2012 x86_64
GNU/Linux
At any time there are not more than 20-30 Connections at once.
Swap is disabled.
free -m
total used free sharedbuffers cached
Mem: 32215 16163 16051
Hi,
On 17 Březen 2014, 11:45, basti wrote:
> Hello,
>
> we have a database master Version:
> PostgreSQL 9.1.6 on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, compiled by gcc (Debian
> 4.7.2-2) 4.7.2, 64-bit
> and a WAL-Replication Slave with hot-standby version:
> PostgreSQL 9.1.9 on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, compil
Hello,
we have a database master Version:
PostgreSQL 9.1.6 on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, compiled by gcc (Debian
4.7.2-2) 4.7.2, 64-bit
and a WAL-Replication Slave with hot-standby version:
PostgreSQL 9.1.9 on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, compiled by gcc (Debian
4.7.2-5) 4.7.2, 64-bit.
Since a few da
Le dimanche 13 janvier 2013 à 18:27 +, Shaun Thomas a écrit :
> I'm not sure the last time I saw this discussion, but I was somewhat curious:
> what would be your ideal Linux distribution for a nice solid PostgreSQL
> installation? We've kinda bounced back and forth between RHEL, CentOS, and
- Original Message -
From: "Stuart Bishop"
To: "Bruce Momjian"
Cc: "Scott Marlowe" , "SUNDAY A. OLUTAYO"
, "Gavin Flower" , "Chris
Ernst" , pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2013 1:00:56 PM
Subject:
> On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 08:46:58PM -0700, Scott Marlowe wrote:
>> The reasons to NOT use ubuntu under PostgreSQL are primarily that 1:
>> they often choose a pretty meh grade kernel with performance
>> regressions for their initial LTS release. I.e. they'll choose a
>> 3.4.0 kernel over a very s
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 2:02 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 08:46:58PM -0700, Scott Marlowe wrote:
>> The reasons to NOT use ubuntu under PostgreSQL are primarily that 1:
>> they often choose a pretty meh grade kernel with performance
>> regressions for their initial LTS releas
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 08:46:58PM -0700, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> The reasons to NOT use ubuntu under PostgreSQL are primarily that 1:
> they often choose a pretty meh grade kernel with performance
> regressions for their initial LTS release. I.e. they'll choose a
> 3.4.0 kernel over a very stable
Le mardi 15 janvier 2013 à 07:52 -0700, Scott Marlowe a écrit :
> On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 4:54 AM, Vincent Veyron wrote:
> > Le lundi 14 janvier 2013 à 16:35 -0600, Shaun Thomas a écrit :
> >
> >> My personal server is on Debian too, with a similar uptime. But we
> >> recently ran into this guy on
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 4:54 AM, Vincent Veyron wrote:
> Le lundi 14 janvier 2013 à 16:35 -0600, Shaun Thomas a écrit :
>
>> My personal server is on Debian too, with a similar uptime. But we
>> recently ran into this guy on our 12.04 Ubuntu systems:
>>
>> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source
Le mardi 15 janvier 2013 à 12:54 +0100, Daniel Verite a écrit :
> Vincent Veyron wrote:
>
> >
> > > On Debian/Ubuntu, the default behavior is to have SSL enabled out
> > > of the box, including for TCP connections to localhost.
> >
> > It is in Ubuntu, but not in Debian.
>
> No, I've seen
Vincent Veyron wrote:
>
> > On Debian/Ubuntu, the default behavior is to have SSL enabled out
> > of the box, including for TCP connections to localhost.
>
> It is in Ubuntu, but not in Debian.
No, I've seen it a number of times with Debian. pg_createcluster will enable
SSL in postgresq
Le lundi 14 janvier 2013 à 16:35 -0600, Shaun Thomas a écrit :
> My personal server is on Debian too, with a similar uptime. But we
> recently ran into this guy on our 12.04 Ubuntu systems:
>
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/1055222
>
Ha, so you seem to need to use the X
On 15.01.2013, at 00:28, Rich Shepard wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Jan 2013, T. E. Lawrence wrote:
>
>> When forced on Linux we like Debian because it is so conservative (which
>> can sometimes drive one crazy, especially if one needs some cutting edge
>> feature).
>
> T.
>
> Take a look at Slackware
> Hey guys,
>
> I'm not sure the last time I saw this discussion, but I was somewhat curious:
> what would be your ideal Linux distribution for a nice solid PostgreSQL
> installation? We've kinda bounced back and forth between RHEL, CentOS, and
> Ubuntu LTS, so I was wondering what everyone els
On 01/14/2013 04:19 PM, Vincent Veyron wrote:
The only downtime I had in over two years was due a forced bios upgrade
by the hosting service, and I have no formal training in server
administration. Debian stable certainly works.
My personal server is on Debian too, with a similar uptime. But w
Le lundi 14 janvier 2013 à 18:03 +0100, Daniel Verite a écrit :
> On Debian/Ubuntu, the default behavior is to have SSL enabled out
> of the box, including for TCP connections to localhost.
It is in Ubuntu, but not in Debian.
To the OP : I maintain three servers using Debian stable, each facing
Edson Richter wrote:
> Do you have any fact that support RHEL being slower than others?
> I would like to improve our servers if we can get some ideas - so far,
> we have tried Ubuntu LTS servers, and seems just as fast as RHEL for
> PostgreSQL (tests made by issuing heavy queries).
On
On 14/01/13 22:24, Hendrik Visage wrote:
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 8:27 PM, Shaun Thomas
mailto:stho...@optionshouse.com>> wrote:
Hey guys,
I'm not sure the last time I saw this discussion, but I was
somewhat curious: what would be your ideal Linux distribution for
a nice sol
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 8:54 PM, Edson Richter wrote:
> Em 14/01/2013 01:46, Scott Marlowe escreveu:
>>
>> My preference personally is for debian based distros since they
>> support the rather more elegant pg wrappers that allow you to run
>> multiple versions and multiple clusters of those versio
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 8:27 PM, Shaun Thomas wrote:
> Hey guys,
>
> I'm not sure the last time I saw this discussion, but I was somewhat
> curious: what would be your ideal Linux distribution for a nice solid
> PostgreSQL installation? We've kinda bounced back and forth between RHEL,
> CentOS, an
On 2013-01-14 00:44, Gavin Flower wrote:
On 14/01/13 07:27, Shaun Thomas wrote:
Hey guys,
I'm not sure the last time I saw this discussion, but I was somewhat
curious: what would be your ideal Linux distribution for a nice solid
PostgreSQL installation? We've kinda bounced back and forth bet
On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 2:46 PM, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> Most importantly, if you've got LOTS of talent for one distro or
> another, you're probably best off exploiting it. If 95% of all the
> developers and ops crew run Ubuntu or Debian, stick to one of them.
> If they favor Fedora / RHEL stick t
On 14/01/13 16:46, Scott Marlowe wrote:
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 4:06 PM, SUNDAY A. OLUTAYO wrote:
4 reasons:
1. One place where I worked Ubuntu was standard, I tried it and found
that it lacked at least a couple of desktop features in GNOME 2 that
I found very useful into Fedora. F
Em 14/01/2013 01:46, Scott Marlowe escreveu:
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 4:06 PM, SUNDAY A. OLUTAYO wrote:
4 reasons:
1. One place where I worked Ubuntu was standard, I tried it and found
that it lacked at least a couple of desktop features in GNOME 2 that
I found very useful into Fedo
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 4:06 PM, SUNDAY A. OLUTAYO wrote:
> 4 reasons:
>
> 1. One place where I worked Ubuntu was standard, I tried it and found
> that it lacked at least a couple of desktop features in GNOME 2 that
> I found very useful into Fedora. Fortunately, I was allowed to
> re
I'm not sure the last time I saw this discussion, but I was somewhat
curious: what would be your ideal Linux distribution for a nice solid
PostgreSQL installation? We've kinda bounced back and forth between
RHEL, CentOS, and Ubuntu LTS, so I was wondering what everyone else
thought.
We run
Em 13/01/2013 16:27, Shaun Thomas escreveu:
Hey guys,
I'm not sure the last time I saw this discussion, but I was somewhat curious:
what would be your ideal Linux distribution for a nice solid PostgreSQL
installation? We've kinda bounced back and forth between RHEL, CentOS, and
Ubuntu LTS, so
On 01/13/2013 04:07 PM, Chris Ernst wrote:
On 01/13/2013 03:44 PM, Gavin Flower wrote:
I've seen the opinion of "avoid Ubuntu like the plague" expressed many
times, but it is never followed up with any solid reasoning. Can you
(or anyone else) give specific details on exactly why you believe Ub
Please don't top post, add your comments at the end as per the norm for
this group.
On 14/01/13 12:06, SUNDAY A. OLUTAYO wrote:
Ubuntu did the marketing for linux and many more. Some people are just haters.
Can you tell us about upstart?
Sent from my LG Mobile
Gavin Flower wrote:
On 14/01/
Ubuntu did the marketing for linux and many more. Some people are just haters.
Can you tell us about upstart?
Sent from my LG Mobile
Gavin Flower wrote:
On 14/01/13 13:07, Chris Ernst wrote:
> On 01/13/2013 03:44 PM, Gavin Flower wrote:
>> I would tend use Fedora for development, but would co
On 14/01/13 13:07, Chris Ernst wrote:
On 01/13/2013 03:44 PM, Gavin Flower wrote:
I would tend use Fedora for development, but would consider CentOS (or
RHEL, if we had the budget) for production - I avoid Ubuntu like the
plague.
I happen to be doing my own research on this matter. I tend to
On Jan 13, 2013, at 10:27 AM, Shaun Thomas wrote:
> Hey guys,
>
> I'm not sure the last time I saw this discussion, but I was somewhat curious:
> what would be your ideal Linux distribution for a nice solid PostgreSQL
> installation? We've kinda bounced back and forth between RHEL, CentOS, an
On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 11:07 AM, Chris Ernst wrote:
> I've seen the opinion of "avoid Ubuntu like the plague" expressed many
> times, but it is never followed up with any solid reasoning. Can you (or
> anyone else) give specific details on exactly why you believe Ubuntu should
> be avoided?
I s
On 01/13/2013 03:44 PM, Gavin Flower wrote:
I would tend use Fedora for development, but would consider CentOS (or
RHEL, if we had the budget) for production - I avoid Ubuntu like the plague.
I happen to be doing my own research on this matter. I tend to lean
more toward RHEL or CentOS for pr
I use Ubuntu for development and production, it is rock solid.
Thanks,
Sunday Olutayo
- Original Message -
From: "Gavin Flower"
To: "Shaun Thomas"
Cc: "pgsql-general@postgresql.org"
Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2013 11:44:42 PM
Subject: Re
On 14/01/13 07:27, Shaun Thomas wrote:
Hey guys,
I'm not sure the last time I saw this discussion, but I was somewhat curious:
what would be your ideal Linux distribution for a nice solid PostgreSQL
installation? We've kinda bounced back and forth between RHEL, CentOS, and
Ubuntu LTS, so I wa
Hey guys,
I'm not sure the last time I saw this discussion, but I was somewhat curious:
what would be your ideal Linux distribution for a nice solid PostgreSQL
installation? We've kinda bounced back and forth between RHEL, CentOS, and
Ubuntu LTS, so I was wondering what everyone else thought.
On 2012-09-27 11:21:04 -0300, Leonardo M. Ramé wrote:
> On 2012-09-27 11:02:48 -0300, Leonardo M. Ramé wrote:
> > On 2012-09-27 06:53:57 -0700, Adrian Klaver wrote:
> > > On 09/27/2012 04:46 AM, Leonardo M. Ramé wrote:
> > > >On 2012-09-27 11:51:46 +0800, a...@hsk.hk wrote:
> > > >>Hi,
> > > >>
> >
On 2012-09-27 11:02:48 -0300, Leonardo M. Ramé wrote:
> On 2012-09-27 06:53:57 -0700, Adrian Klaver wrote:
> > On 09/27/2012 04:46 AM, Leonardo M. Ramé wrote:
> > >On 2012-09-27 11:51:46 +0800, a...@hsk.hk wrote:
> > >>Hi,
> > >>
> > >>Could you provide the steps and commands you used to compile 9.
On 2012-09-27 06:53:57 -0700, Adrian Klaver wrote:
> On 09/27/2012 04:46 AM, Leonardo M. Ramé wrote:
> >On 2012-09-27 11:51:46 +0800, a...@hsk.hk wrote:
> >>Hi,
> >>
> >>Could you provide the steps and commands you used to compile 9.1?
> >>
> >>I want to reproduce your case in my machine
> >>
> >>R
On 2012-09-27 06:53:57 -0700, Adrian Klaver wrote:
> On 09/27/2012 04:46 AM, Leonardo M. Ramé wrote:
> >On 2012-09-27 11:51:46 +0800, a...@hsk.hk wrote:
> >>Hi,
> >>
> >>Could you provide the steps and commands you used to compile 9.1?
> >>
> >>I want to reproduce your case in my machine
> >>
> >>R
On 09/27/2012 04:46 AM, Leonardo M. Ramé wrote:
On 2012-09-27 11:51:46 +0800, a...@hsk.hk wrote:
Hi,
Could you provide the steps and commands you used to compile 9.1?
I want to reproduce your case in my machine
Regards
Arthur
Yes, I downloaded postgresql-9.1.5.tar.gz from the PostgreSql we
On 2012-09-27 21:44:21 +0800, a...@hsk.hk wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have tried to compile it in my local machine, I could not reproduce the
> issue yet.
>
> Does anyone else have idea what the reason would be? Would the issue come
> from the config file?
>
> Regards
> Arthur
>
> On 27 Sep 2012, a
Hi,
I have tried to compile it in my local machine, I could not reproduce the issue
yet.
Does anyone else have idea what the reason would be? Would the issue come from
the config file?
Regards
Arthur
On 27 Sep 2012, at 7:46 PM, Leonardo M. Ramé wrote:
> On 2012-09-27 11:51:46 +0800, a...@
On 2012-09-27 11:51:46 +0800, a...@hsk.hk wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Could you provide the steps and commands you used to compile 9.1?
>
> I want to reproduce your case in my machine
>
> Regards
> Arthur
>
Yes, I downloaded postgresql-9.1.5.tar.gz from the PostgreSql web site,
then did this:
tar xvfz p
Hi,
Could you provide the steps and commands you used to compile 9.1?
I want to reproduce your case in my machine
Regards
Arthur
On 27 Sep 2012, at 7:46 AM, Leonardo M. Ramé wrote:
> Hi, I compiled PostgreSql 9.1 from sources in a OpenSuse 10.1 PowerPC
> machine. While trying to test one appli
Hi, I compiled PostgreSql 9.1 from sources in a OpenSuse 10.1 PowerPC
machine. While trying to test one application, I've got errors just
before connecting to the database, and found my app is loading
linux-vdso64.so.1 while libpq.so uses linux-vdso32.so.1
This means the PostgreSql libraries where
On mån, 2011-03-21 at 11:22 +0100, Durumdara wrote:
> The language is Windows 1250 (ISO-8859-2).
>
> I remembered that when I tried in 8.1 to create database as same in Windows:
>
> CharSet: Win1250
> Collation: - (disabled, and it is handled as HUN - iso-8859-2)
>
> then I failed.
>
> Because
Dear Everybody!
We need to choice a DB for our new project.
Two of the databases are possible to choose.
1.) PGSQL 9.x
2.) FireBird 2.x
We needs to serve 75/80 users in a time.
The client platform is Windows, Delphi based applications with [Zeos/PGDAC]
or [IBX/ZEOS].
The server is may Windows,
On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 6:20 AM, Sim Zacks wrote:
> We are about to build a new database server, our plan is to use Debian.
>
> Is there documentation of recommended server configurations for Linux, such
> as kernel parameters, preferred file system, etc that work best with
> postgresql?
>
> I'm no
On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 9:38 AM, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> As a followup, I'd like to point out that you can probably get more
> performance wise from hardware upgrades than from tuning your OS.
> Something as simple as an $800 caching RAID controller can make a
>
Totally agree here. Throwing hardwa
As a followup, I'd like to point out that you can probably get more
performance wise from hardware upgrades than from tuning your OS.
Something as simple as an $800 caching RAID controller can make a
workstation class machine into a monster performer, going from 250 tps
to 3000 tps with one simple
On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 4:20 AM, Sim Zacks wrote:
> We are about to build a new database server, our plan is to use Debian.
>
> Is there documentation of recommended server configurations for Linux, such
> as kernel parameters, preferred file system, etc that work best with
> postgresql?
This real
I don't think that it makes sense to look at PG tuning and server
tuning as two separate tasks. XFS was recently benchmarked using
bonnie++ by Greg Smith, with interesting results:
http://blog.2ndquadrant.com/en/2010/04/the-return-of-xfs-on-linux.html
That said, my guess is that the majority of l
We are about to build a new database server, our plan is to use Debian.
Is there documentation of recommended server configurations for Linux,
such as kernel parameters, preferred file system, etc that work best
with postgresql?
I'm not talking about the pg configuration, which I have seen a
On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 17:34, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 8:20 AM, Peter Geoghegan
> wrote:
>> Actually, there is a 64-bit port for windows now. I don't think I
>> misrepresented Magnus - the post suggested that the then-lack of a
>> 64-bit windows port wasn't a pressing issue
1 - 100 of 329 matches
Mail list logo
