Re: [PERFORM] Please ignore ...
Hi all the ignorers, ;) Greg Smith wrote: On Thu, 1 May 2008, D'Arcy J.M. Cain wrote: Whenever I see one of those I simply blackhole the server sending them. Ah, the ever popular vigilante spam method. What if the message is coming from, say, gmail.com, and it's getting routed so that you're not sure which account is originating it? Do you blackhole everybody on *that* server just because there's one idiot? This is the same problem on a smaller scale. It's not clear which account is reponsible, and I believe I saw that there are other people using the same ISP who also subscribe to the list. That's why Marc is testing who the guilty party is rather than unsubscribing everyone there. yes, blackholing is bad as well as accepting everything and then sending out errors. Unfortunaly, email resembles the ideas of the decade when it was invented (freedom of speach over regulating) so security is only available as ad on. I wish however everybody would go by cryptography, meaning in our case the sender signs and the list checks (1) and also the list signs (2) when sending out, which makes it easy to check for the receiver if to accept the mail or decline in band... Cheers Tino PS: happy 1st of may :-) smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: [PERFORM] Postgres replication
On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 5:47 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm about to setup a similar config and what I was intending to do is to > run pgpool on both boxes and use heartbeat (from http://linux-ha.org ) to > move an IP address from one box to the other. clients connect to this > virtual IP and then pgpool will distribute the connections to both systems > from there. How about pgpool-HA? It's a script that integrates pgpool and heartbeat. http://pgfoundry.org/projects/pgpool/ -- Fujii Masao NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION NTT Open Source Software Center -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
Re: [PERFORM] Please ignore ...
On Thu, 1 May 2008 02:55:10 -0400 (EDT) Greg Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, 1 May 2008, D'Arcy J.M. Cain wrote: > > > Whenever I see one of those I simply blackhole the server sending them. > > Ah, the ever popular vigilante spam method. What if the message is coming > from, say, gmail.com, and it's getting routed so that you're not sure > which account is originating it? Do you blackhole everybody on *that* > server just because there's one idiot? Well, I actually do block gmail groups on another list that is gatewayed to a newsgroup due to the volume of spam that originates from there but in this case my experience has been that it is done by a service. For example, I reject all email from spamarrest.com. There is nothing I want to see from them. > This is the same problem on a smaller scale. It's not clear which account > is reponsible, and I believe I saw that there are other people using the > same ISP who also subscribe to the list. That's why Marc is testing who > the guilty party is rather than unsubscribing everyone there. Of course. If someone is running it on a server independent of the ISP that's a different story. However, it is pretty hard to run that code on most ISPs without the cooperation of the ISP. That's why there are companies like SpamArrest. People who run their own server and are in a position to do this themself tend to also be smart enough to understand why it is a bad idea. On the other hand, this type of thing is no different than spam and in this day and age every ISP, no matter how big, has a responsibility to deal with spammers on their own system and if they don't they deserve to be blocked just like any other spam-friendly system. The fact that Marc has to run this test and does not immediately know who the guilty party is suggests to me that they are using a service. I never saw the offending message myself so perhaps it is coming from SpamArrest and I just rejected the email on my SMTP server. -- D'Arcy J.M. Cain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | Democracy is three wolves http://www.druid.net/darcy/| and a sheep voting on +1 416 425 1212 (DoD#0082)(eNTP) | what's for dinner. -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
Re: [PERFORM] Benchmarks WAS: Sun Talks about MySQL
Joshua D. Drake wrote: On Mon, 28 Apr 2008 14:40:25 -0400 Gregory Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: We certainly can pass TPC-C. I'm curious what you mean by 1/4 though? On similar hardware? Or the maximum we can scale to is 1/4 as large as Oracle? Can you point me to the actual benchmark runs you're referring to? I would be curious as well considering there has been zero evidence provided to make such a statement. I am not saying it isn't true, it wouldn't be surprising to me if Oracle outperformed PostgreSQL in TPC-C but I would sure like to see in general how wel we do (or don't). Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake I am sorry but I am far from catching my emails: Best thing is to work with TPC-E benchmarks involving the community. (TPC-C requirements is way too high on storage and everybody seems to be getting on the TPC-E bandwagon slowly.) Where can I get the latest DBT5 (TPC-E) kit ? Using the kit should allow me to recreate setups which can then be made available for various PostgreSQL Performance engineers to look at it. Regards, Jignesh -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
