>
> Hello,
>
> I believe I found my problem. The Cisco VPN client I use encrypts data
> at a 168 bit level. Postgres only supports up to 128 bit correct?
That's your VPN's end-to-end/network-to-network connectivity. It has
nothing to do with PostgreSQL at all.
(Note: Please do NOT copy me on
Greg wrote:
Hi,
Frankly I don't know what should I do more. The problem is:
I've made a pg_dump from shell like that:
pg_dump -Upostgres -O -D -Fc --file=baza.sql
Copied the file to new server and from shell executed:
linux:~ # pg_restore -d ppr -U postgres -i baza.sql
The result is
pg_restore: [ar
Some basics on how easy it is to install/configure and some before/after type
benchmarks showing how it affected performance. Perferrably you could
measure simple vs. complex queries as well as update vs. insert performance.
If you're really ambitious you could try running one of the tpc style
Thanks Mike!
Do you know if pgSQL will be supporting higher level of encryption in
the near future? Most of us here at Ameritrade work from home via VPN.
-Original Message-
From: mike g [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2004 12:51 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PR
Does Postgresql have a bulk loading utility that allows you to load
large amounts of data and doesn’t write to log files (WAL files) ?
I need to load over a gig of data a day and don’t want it to
write to logs.
Thank you!
~ Troy Campano ~
start here: http://techdocs.postgresql.org/guides/GUITools
Robert Treat
On Fri, 2004-05-21 at 22:18, Paul Gimpelj wrote:
> hi,
>
> I was wondering if someone can give me some advice.
>
> I presently use pgaccess tcl based.
>
> But I would prefer a c or c++ client server admin , somewhat li
Campano, Troy wrote:
> Does Postgresql have a bulk loading utility that allows you to load
> large amounts of data and doesn't write to log files (WAL files) ?
>
> I need to load over a gig of data a day and don't want it to write to
> logs.
No. We have COPY that does the load quickly, but it do
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Thanks Mike!
>
> Do you know if pgSQL will be supporting higher level of encryption in
> the near future? Most of us here at Ameritrade work from home via VPN.
We support SSL so you don't need VPN encryption. However, we should
work with whatever VPN encryption you ar
We are working on checking to see whether a database has been created
from a Perl/Pg interface. Is there an easy way to count tables such
that if the count comes back at zero the script knows that the database
has not yet been created?
We tried simply using \d but cannot get that to work. I w
On Wed, May 26, 2004 at 10:27:41 -0400,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Thanks Mike!
>
> Do you know if pgSQL will be supporting higher level of encryption in
> the near future? Most of us here at Ameritrade work from home via VPN.
The client can use ssl. That supports 128 bit keys which is plenty.
Thanks so much! :)
-Original Message-
From: Bruce Momjian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2004 10:56 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [ADMIN] pg_hba.conf
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Thanks Mike!
>
> Do yo
Note: Please do NOT Cc: me on replies to the mailing list. I read the
mailing list. One copy of your comments is sufficient. Thank you.
>
> Thanks Mike!
>
> Do you know if pgSQL will be supporting higher level of encryption in
> the near future? Most of us here at Ameritrade work from home vi
On Wed, May 26, 2004 at 11:14:00 -0400,
Jodi Kanter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> We are working on checking to see whether a database has been created
> from a Perl/Pg interface. Is there an easy way to count tables such
You should be checking the return code when creating each object and
th
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (mike g) writes:
> I believe I found my problem. The Cisco VPN client I use encrypts data
> at a 168 bit level. Postgres only supports up to 128 bit correct?
That ought to be entirely irrelevant, as your VPN client would encrypt
all data going across the network, encrypted or n
Hello,
I finally got it to work and as some have mentioned it was not the
encryption level.
I had setup my pg_hba.conf originally like this:
host all all 10.15.0.0 255.255.255.0 trust
I was under the impression that the .0 was supposed to be equivalent to
a wildcard entry so
> I had setup my pg_hba.conf originally like this:
>
> host all all 10.15.0.0 255.255.255.0 trust
>
>
> I was under the impression that the .0 was supposed to be equivalent to
> a wildcard entry so that any connection from 10.15 would be able to
> connect. This was not so. By c
On Tuesday 10 February 2004 07:37 pm, Jeremy Smith wrote:
> I actually had to install version 7.4.0 as there weren't any RPMs for 7.4.1
> on Redhat 7.3. I am setting up some tables using phpPGadmin right now, and
> there is a link for "vacuum" so maybe that's it..
Look in
ftp://ftp.postgresql.or
Again you got it right although my customer was sure he had 7.1 running I
asked him to run psql -V which resolved version 7.2.1
Thanx,
Laurens
-Original Message-
From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2004 8:46 PM
To: Laurens Wagemakers
Cc: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Su
18 matches
Mail list logo
