Re: Wikipedia on Postgres (was Re: [GENERAL] postgresql vs mysql)
While no one in thier right mind should be using wikipgedia, I'm sympathetic to those who might still be stuck on it for some reason, so if you guys can produce a patch against the wikipgedia cvs, I'd be happy to apply it. I'd like to patch that name. ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 1: 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: Wikipedia on Postgres (was Re: [GENERAL] postgresql vs mysql)
On Friday 23 February 2007 16:43, Chad Wagner wrote:
> On 2/23/07, Bill Moran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > In any case if anyone is interested I was able to reproduce the changes
> >
> > that
> >
> > > wikipgedia made and applied those changes (as well as others) all the
> >
> > way up
> >
> > > to the 1.6.10 codebase. The only reason I mention this is because
> > > 1.6is the only choice for PHP4 users. If anyone is interested I can
> > > provide
> >
> > the
> >
> > > codebase, the schema still has to be created manually as was the case
> >
> > with
> >
> > > wikipgedia.
> >
> > I would be interested. I'm probably expected to maintain this thing ...
>
> You can download it from:
>
> http://www.postgresqlforums.com/downloads/pgmediawiki-1.6.10.tar.gz
>
> Again, like wikipgedia you have to create a schema (manually) named
> mediawiki and like wikipgedia (because the port more or less used some of
> the same mods they made) MySQL support is probably broken.
While no one in thier right mind should be using wikipgedia, I'm sympathetic
to those who might still be stuck on it for some reason, so if you guys can
produce a patch against the wikipgedia cvs, I'd be happy to apply it.
--
Robert Treat
Build A Brighter LAMP :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
Re: Wikipedia on Postgres (was Re: [GENERAL] postgresql vs mysql)
On 2/25/07, Magnus Hagander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > For the record, anyone using wikipgedia deserves the pain they > get: it is deprecated. The latest version of MediaWiki itself is what > should now be used: it will detect if you have Postgres upon > installation. :) Perhaps the project should be *gasp* deleted then? ;-) Or is there actual historical information there that someone would be interested in? As I said in my other mail, some folks are still using PHP4 -- which is why MediaWiki still maintains the 1.6 branch. I am more than willing to contribute the most recent 1.6.10 codebase w/ PostgreSQL modifications to the foundry. I am actively maintaining my own codebase for my site. I agree with Greg, if you are already using PHP5 then use the MediaWiki distribution, but if your stuck on PHP4 like me then you really don't have a choice other than what is being offered on pgfoundry. :)
Re: Wikipedia on Postgres (was Re: [GENERAL] postgresql vs mysql)
On 2/25/07, Greg Sabino Mullane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: For the record, anyone using wikipgedia deserves the pain they get: it is deprecated. The latest version of MediaWiki itself is what should now be used: it will detect if you have Postgres upon installation. :) Some of us are still using php4 :)
Re: Wikipedia on Postgres (was Re: [GENERAL] postgresql vs mysql)
> For the record, anyone using wikipgedia deserves the pain they > get: it is deprecated. The latest version of MediaWiki itself is what > should now be used: it will detect if you have Postgres upon > installation. :) Perhaps the project should be *gasp* deleted then? ;-) Or is there actual historical information there that someone would be interested in? //Magnus ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
Re: Wikipedia on Postgres (was Re: [GENERAL] postgresql vs mysql)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: RIPEMD160 > How is the Postgres port of the Wikipedia doing this days anyway? > Is it in a shape where one would consider it "competitive"? The port of MediaWiki is going well: it is certainly usable, and is already being used by a number of sites. I would not say it is quite "competitive" yet as far as being ready to run Wikipedia, as the codebase has a lot of very mysql-specific stuff that has yet to be fixed/coded around. There are also a few lingering bugs, most related to the fact that the MediaWiki on Mysql stores dates as char(14). For the record, anyone using wikipgedia deserves the pain they get: it is deprecated. The latest version of MediaWiki itself is what should now be used: it will detect if you have Postgres upon installation. :) http://www.mediawiki.org/ - -- Greg Sabino Mullane [EMAIL PROTECTED] End Point Corporation PGP Key: 0x14964AC8 200702250925 http://biglumber.com/x/web?pk=2529DF6AB8F79407E94445B4BC9B906714964AC8 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iD8DBQFF4ZyDvJuQZxSWSsgRA8c6AJ95oTX9YQ38VyPvFyhd54S3rHAZSACgh/tC uqcAmRFuRnMUdPL7sO/eoP0= =w2KL -END PGP SIGNATURE- ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
Re: Wikipedia on Postgres (was Re: [GENERAL] postgresql vs mysql)
On 2/23/07, Bill Moran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > In any case if anyone is interested I was able to reproduce the changes that > wikipgedia made and applied those changes (as well as others) all the way up > to the 1.6.10 codebase. The only reason I mention this is because 1.6is > the only choice for PHP4 users. If anyone is interested I can provide the > codebase, the schema still has to be created manually as was the case with > wikipgedia. I would be interested. I'm probably expected to maintain this thing ... You can download it from: http://www.postgresqlforums.com/downloads/pgmediawiki-1.6.10.tar.gz Again, like wikipgedia you have to create a schema (manually) named mediawiki and like wikipgedia (because the port more or less used some of the same mods they made) MySQL support is probably broken.
Re: Wikipedia on Postgres (was Re: [GENERAL] postgresql vs mysql)
Le vendredi 23 février 2007 16:37, Ian Harding a écrit : > On 2/22/07, Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Joshua D. Drake escribió: > > > Andrej Ricnik-Bay wrote: > > > > On 2/23/07, Jim Nasby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> That depends greatly on what you're doing with it. Generally, as > > > >> soon as you start throwing a multi-user workload at it, MySQL stops > > > >> scaling. http://tweakers.net recently did a study on that. > > > > > > > > I think I recall that wikipedia uses MySQL ... they get quite a few > > > > hits, too, I believe. > > > > > > And outages if you watch :) > > > > Does this mean that we believe the Wikipedia would not suffer any > > outages if it ran on Postgres? > > > > How is the Postgres port of the Wikipedia doing this days anyway? Is it > > in a shape where one would consider it "competitive"? > > I use mediawiki with postgres and it works fine, except for a bug > regarding timestamps. That bug is due to mysqlism of the code. Once > that's fixed, it will be ready as far as I'm concerned. I get an error with tsearch2 query parser, and patch that. ( http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8958 , thanks Greg ) > > There have been some tragic and embarrassing data losses by > some big sites that should know better because they used mysql without > the heroic measures that are needed to make it safe. I don't care > that much that big sites use it, big sites start small and don't > always start with the best tools. Once started, it's hard to switch > over to better tools. If you used enough volkswagen beetles you could > move the same number of passengers on the same routes as Greyhound > does with buses, but that doesn't mean they are the right > tool. > > > - Ian > > ---(end of broadcast)--- > TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
Re: Wikipedia on Postgres (was Re: [GENERAL] postgresql vs mysql)
On 2/22/07, Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Joshua D. Drake escribió: > Andrej Ricnik-Bay wrote: > > On 2/23/07, Jim Nasby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> That depends greatly on what you're doing with it. Generally, as soon > >> as you start throwing a multi-user workload at it, MySQL stops > >> scaling. http://tweakers.net recently did a study on that. > > I think I recall that wikipedia uses MySQL ... they get quite a few > > hits, too, I believe. > > And outages if you watch :) Does this mean that we believe the Wikipedia would not suffer any outages if it ran on Postgres? How is the Postgres port of the Wikipedia doing this days anyway? Is it in a shape where one would consider it "competitive"? I use mediawiki with postgres and it works fine, except for a bug regarding timestamps. That bug is due to mysqlism of the code. Once that's fixed, it will be ready as far as I'm concerned. There have been some tragic and embarrassing data losses by some big sites that should know better because they used mysql without the heroic measures that are needed to make it safe. I don't care that much that big sites use it, big sites start small and don't always start with the best tools. Once started, it's hard to switch over to better tools. If you used enough volkswagen beetles you could move the same number of passengers on the same routes as Greyhound does with buses, but that doesn't mean they are the right tool. - Ian ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
Re: Wikipedia on Postgres (was Re: [GENERAL] postgresql vs mysql)
In response to "Chad Wagner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On 2/23/07, Bill Moran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I installed wikipgdia for the WPLUG wiki: > > http://wplug.ece.cmu.edu/wiki/ > > Isn't that the same wikipgedia that is found at pgFoundry? Yes. > The only issue I > really had the the wikipgedia port is that the codebase is 1.6alpha, and it > seemed like it wasn't being actively maintained anymore (infact that is what > the description says), so I am not sure it has all of the bug fixes up to > 1.6.10. I installed it as an experiment, then (while my back was turned) a bunch of people started using it ... now it's a mission-critical part of the WPLUG organization ... Hopefully there aren't any serious bugs hiding anywhere ... > In any case if anyone is interested I was able to reproduce the changes that > wikipgedia made and applied those changes (as well as others) all the way up > to the 1.6.10 codebase. The only reason I mention this is because 1.6 is > the only choice for PHP4 users. If anyone is interested I can provide the > codebase, the schema still has to be created manually as was the case with > wikipgedia. I would be interested. I'm probably expected to maintain this thing ... -- Bill Moran Collaborative Fusion Inc. ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
Re: Wikipedia on Postgres (was Re: [GENERAL] postgresql vs mysql)
On 2/23/07, Bill Moran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I installed wikipgdia for the WPLUG wiki: http://wplug.ece.cmu.edu/wiki/ Isn't that the same wikipgedia that is found at pgFoundry? The only issue I really had the the wikipgedia port is that the codebase is 1.6alpha, and it seemed like it wasn't being actively maintained anymore (infact that is what the description says), so I am not sure it has all of the bug fixes up to 1.6.10. In any case if anyone is interested I was able to reproduce the changes that wikipgedia made and applied those changes (as well as others) all the way up to the 1.6.10 codebase. The only reason I mention this is because 1.6 is the only choice for PHP4 users. If anyone is interested I can provide the codebase, the schema still has to be created manually as was the case with wikipgedia.
Re: Wikipedia on Postgres (was Re: [GENERAL] postgresql vs mysql)
Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Joshua D. Drake escribió: > > Andrej Ricnik-Bay wrote: > > > On 2/23/07, Jim Nasby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> That depends greatly on what you're doing with it. Generally, as soon > > >> as you start throwing a multi-user workload at it, MySQL stops > > >> scaling. http://tweakers.net recently did a study on that. > > > I think I recall that wikipedia uses MySQL ... they get quite a few > > > hits, too, I believe. > > > > And outages if you watch :) > > Does this mean that we believe the Wikipedia would not suffer any > outages if it ran on Postgres? > > How is the Postgres port of the Wikipedia doing this days anyway? Is it > in a shape where one would consider it "competitive"? I installed wikipgdia for the WPLUG wiki: http://wplug.ece.cmu.edu/wiki/ We haven't had a lick of trouble with it since it went up. I don't believe it's experienced any downtime in many months. -- Bill Moran Collaborative Fusion Inc. ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org/
Re: Wikipedia on Postgres (was Re: [GENERAL] postgresql vs mysql)
Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Joshua D. Drake escribió: >> Alvaro Herrera wrote: >>> Joshua D. Drake escribió: Andrej Ricnik-Bay wrote: > On 2/23/07, Jim Nasby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> That depends greatly on what you're doing with it. Generally, as soon >> as you start throwing a multi-user workload at it, MySQL stops >> scaling. http://tweakers.net recently did a study on that. > I think I recall that wikipedia uses MySQL ... they get quite a few > hits, too, I believe. And outages if you watch :) >>> Does this mean that we believe the Wikipedia would not suffer any >>> outages if it ran on Postgres? >> I believe it would suffer less outage yes. > > And how is SourceForge doing these days, by the way? Wonderful of course :) Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake -- === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. === Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240 Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 http://www.commandprompt.com/ Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/ ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
Re: Wikipedia on Postgres (was Re: [GENERAL] postgresql vs mysql)
Joshua D. Drake escribió: > Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > Joshua D. Drake escribió: > >> Andrej Ricnik-Bay wrote: > >>> On 2/23/07, Jim Nasby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > That depends greatly on what you're doing with it. Generally, as soon > as you start throwing a multi-user workload at it, MySQL stops > scaling. http://tweakers.net recently did a study on that. > >>> I think I recall that wikipedia uses MySQL ... they get quite a few > >>> hits, too, I believe. > >> And outages if you watch :) > > > > Does this mean that we believe the Wikipedia would not suffer any > > outages if it ran on Postgres? > > I believe it would suffer less outage yes. And how is SourceForge doing these days, by the way? -- Alvaro Herrerahttp://www.CommandPrompt.com/ PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not match
Re: Wikipedia on Postgres (was Re: [GENERAL] postgresql vs mysql)
Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Joshua D. Drake escribió: >> Andrej Ricnik-Bay wrote: >>> On 2/23/07, Jim Nasby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: That depends greatly on what you're doing with it. Generally, as soon as you start throwing a multi-user workload at it, MySQL stops scaling. http://tweakers.net recently did a study on that. >>> I think I recall that wikipedia uses MySQL ... they get quite a few >>> hits, too, I believe. >> And outages if you watch :) > > Does this mean that we believe the Wikipedia would not suffer any > outages if it ran on Postgres? I believe it would suffer less outage yes. > > How is the Postgres port of the Wikipedia doing this days anyway? Is it > in a shape where one would consider it "competitive"? I don't know, I believe citizideum or whatever it is called is PostgreSQL based. Joshua D. Drake > -- === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. === Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240 Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 http://www.commandprompt.com/ Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/ ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
Wikipedia on Postgres (was Re: [GENERAL] postgresql vs mysql)
Joshua D. Drake escribió: > Andrej Ricnik-Bay wrote: > > On 2/23/07, Jim Nasby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> That depends greatly on what you're doing with it. Generally, as soon > >> as you start throwing a multi-user workload at it, MySQL stops > >> scaling. http://tweakers.net recently did a study on that. > > I think I recall that wikipedia uses MySQL ... they get quite a few > > hits, too, I believe. > > And outages if you watch :) Does this mean that we believe the Wikipedia would not suffer any outages if it ran on Postgres? How is the Postgres port of the Wikipedia doing this days anyway? Is it in a shape where one would consider it "competitive"? -- Alvaro Herrerahttp://www.CommandPrompt.com/ PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
