Hi Ганц, I think I understand now.
I'm not sure if both processes (data updater that process events and the
rest of the Mojo workers that just querys Cache::FastMmap data answering to
http requests) can be written in a "non-blocking" way. (Cache::FastMmap
doesn't seem to support non-blocking ca
You have to use the FreeTDS drivers (http://www.freetds.org) in conjunction
with DBD::ODBC.
On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 11:59 AM, Greg Flynn wrote:
> How are you connecting with MS SQL via DBD::ODBC?
> I've been trying for days to get a successful connection, let alone create
> the schema!
> If you
all good, but there are two questions:
[0] what should the warning be?
[1] what is a good way to deal with an installation that has not changed
the passphrase?
I don't think "moniker" as a default is a good choice. I think you should
be as worried about attack vectors now as about attack vec
Daniel, as a simple explanation:
I have:
$ pstree -p $(:
> Hi,
>
> I am not sure I fully understand your question, but if you already have
> Redis and you want that only one spawned process receives an event, and
> that on next event next spawned process do the same, you could use queue
> comman
Thanks a lot, Daniel!
I will use your ideas related to using Redis queues to build robust
database client, spreading requests across many workers in the pool. That
is wonderful idea!
But for caching i need some other scheme:
One master process that will update Cache::FastMmap cache on receiving
And a quick update for myself. I'm still primarily a PostgreSQL and SQLite
user, now
with Mojo::Pg and Mojo::SQLite, which both support SQL::Abstract for query
generation these days.
--
sebastian
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Mojolicious" group.
>
> So, for further applications I will likely abandon the idea of a DB
> abstraction and might as well switch to Mojo::Pg, if it turns out to be
> suitable after I had a closer look at it.
>
Mojo::Pg is pretty nice for DB abstraction actually.
https://github.com/kraih/mojo-pg/blob/maste
On 17.04.2017 22:59, sri wrote:
> Allright, i'll try to take the topic a little more serious. So straight
> to the point, there is no chance we would accept a change for a security
> feature that results in new attack vectors.
Very sensible IMO.
When I decided on a method for the secret(s), I kne
On Sep 25, 2014, at 12:07 PM, sri wrote:
>> Lets have a little poll, what databases are you using with
>> Mojolicious? And which modules are you currently using to access them?
Oh, this was before I joined the club. Still, I can answer.
I use PostgreSQL, as that database I use has been
