This is great. I've worked on 2 projects in the last year that desperately
needed this. It will certainly make the security model more seamless...
-Paul
Magnus Hagander-2 wrote:
A quick status update on the SSPI authentication part of the GSSAPI
project.
I have libpq SSPI working
only
copies of the database and placed them behind load balancers to make the
data more available. Something like this would allow me to quickly leverage
a read only node to scale out the applicaiton... If it can at all be built,
it would get my first, second and third vote. :)
Regards,
Paul
to the
remote server to be executed as a transaction so that users could still read
from that able while my command was running.
Any ideas???
Thanks in advance,
Paul
Christopher Browne-4 wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul Silveira) writes:
Does anyone have any good examples of implementing snapshot
not
moving data that doesn't need to be moved.
The goal is to only shapshot data in tables that has changed. I would like
to wrap that in a transaction.
-Paul
Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
On Mon, Aug 21, 2006 at 06:40:22AM -0700, Paul Silveira wrote:
Yes the needs are simple. I
Hello,
Does anyone have any good examples of implementing snapshot replication.
I know that PostgreSQL does not have snapshot replication and that Slony-I
is the recomended replication senario but I've configured it and it seems
rather advanced for a shop that is implementing PostgreSQL for the
I really like the CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY suggestion that I've seem in this
thread. That seems like a good alternative to ONLINE and is very easy to
understand.
Regards,
Paul
--
View this message in context:
any blocking or writers or readers.
There might be a better token word to use in this situation but I don't
think that ONLINE would be out of bounds...
Just my 2 cents...
Paul Silveira
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Better-name-syntax-for-%22online%22-index-creation
