Added to FAQ as part of item 1.13:
1.13) How does PostgreSQL compare to other
DBMSs? Can PostgreSQL be embedded?
...
PostgreSQL is designed as a client/server architecture, which
requires separate processes for each client and server, and various
helper processes. Many
On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 7:14 AM, Gurjeet Singh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 11:55 AM, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > but once made it'll be out there
> > somewhere on the Web until cockroaches rule the earth.
>
> Hate to deviate away from the topic, but couldn't res
On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 11:55 AM, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> but once made it'll be out there
> somewhere on the Web until cockroaches rule the earth.
Hate to deviate away from the topic, but couldn't resist sorry.
I had watched this episode of Mythbusters, and they have busted th
On Thu, 2008-03-06 at 01:25 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Greg Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I think it's funny to consider a specific recommendation for SQLite as
> > being out of line when you look at the history here. The whole reason
> > that software even exists is because of the difficu
On Thu, 06 Mar 2008 01:25:35 -0500
Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've got nothing against SQLite. But I am unhappy with the idea of us
> recommending *any* particular bit of software that is not under our
> control, especially in a document that is as widespread and hard to
> update as ou
Greg Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I think it's funny to consider a specific recommendation for SQLite as
> being out of line when you look at the history here. The whole reason
> that software even exists is because of the difficulty of using PostgreSQL
> in this context. See http://www
I think it's funny to consider a specific recommendation for SQLite as
being out of line when you look at the history here. The whole reason
that software even exists is because of the difficulty of using PostgreSQL
in this context. See http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/6650
With that in m
On Wed, 5 Mar 2008 11:40:24 -0800
David Fetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I still think it is good to name a few places to start the research on
> embedded SQL DBMSs rather than leave people with the feeling of, "It's
> all up to you from here. Go away."
Well let's start the +/-
+1 on wordin
On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 10:53:07AM -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Mar 2008 10:30:43 -0800
> "Joshua D. Drake" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I believe there is wording that could be used that would not
> > convey that sentiment.
>
> Such as:
>
> PostgreSQL is designed as a client /
On Wed, 5 Mar 2008 16:17:17 -0300
Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > PostgreSQL is designed as a client / server architecture and does
> > not normally embed in an optimal way. Discussion of other product
> > solutions to the embedded problem is outside the scope of this
> > document.
>
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Mar 2008 10:30:43 -0800
> "Joshua D. Drake" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I believe there is wording that could be used that would not convey
> > that sentiment.
>
> Such as:
>
> PostgreSQL is designed as a client / server architecture and does not
> normal
On Wed, 5 Mar 2008 10:30:43 -0800
"Joshua D. Drake" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I believe there is wording that could be used that would not convey
> that sentiment.
Such as:
PostgreSQL is designed as a client / server architecture and does not
normally embed in an optimal way. Discussion of o
On Wed, 5 Mar 2008 10:25:00 -0800
David Fetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It's good to explain why PG does what it does how it does it, and that
> should be in that section of the FAQ, but continuing, even by silence,
> with an answer equivalent to, "We don't do that. You shouldn't
> either. T
On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 12:56:01PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> David Fetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 12:35:53PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> If we need a FAQ entry on this at all, I'd stop after David's
> >> first two sentences.
>
> > Stopping there seems like a very bad
David Fetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 12:35:53PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> If we need a FAQ entry on this at all, I'd stop after David's first
>> two sentences.
> Stopping there seems like a very bad idea from a public relations
> point of view.
Pointing to an alterna
On Wed, 5 Mar 2008 09:41:26 -0800
David Fetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Stopping there seems like a very bad idea from a public relations
> point of view. Making the suggestion generic and naming several FLOSS
> DBs as an alternative might work better.
IMO, entries last forever, for years an
On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 12:35:53PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Richard Huxton wrote:
> >> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > David Fetter wrote:
> >>> If you really need to embed an
> >>> SQL engine in a binary, consider the excellent
> >>> http://www.sqlite.org/";>
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Richard Huxton wrote:
>> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> David Fetter wrote:
>>> If you really need to embed an
>>> SQL engine in a binary, consider the excellent
>>> http://www.sqlite.org/";>SQLite
>>
>> or http://http://www.firebirdsql.org/";>Firebird
>>
> for
Richard Huxton wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Richard Huxton wrote:
> >> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >>> David Fetter wrote:
> If you really need to embed an
> SQL engine in a binary, consider the excellent
> http://www.sqlite.org/";>SQLite
> >> or http://http://www.firebirdsql.org/";>
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Richard Huxton wrote:
Bruce Momjian wrote:
David Fetter wrote:
If you really need to embed an
SQL engine in a binary, consider the excellent
http://www.sqlite.org/";>SQLite
or http://http://www.firebirdsql.org/";>Firebird
for the purpose.
Just to be fair.
sqlite seem
Richard Huxton wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > David Fetter wrote:
> >> If you really need to embed an
> >> SQL engine in a binary, consider the excellent
> >> http://www.sqlite.org/";>SQLite
>
> or http://http://www.firebirdsql.org/";>Firebird
>
> >> for the purpose.
>
> Just to be fair.
sql
Bruce Momjian wrote:
David Fetter wrote:
If you really need to embed an
SQL engine in a binary, consider the excellent
http://www.sqlite.org/";>SQLite
or http://http://www.firebirdsql.org/";>Firebird
for the purpose.
Just to be fair.
--
Richard Huxton
Archonet Ltd
--
Sent via pgsql-d
David Fetter wrote:
> Folks,
>
> I just got yet another question about embedding Postgres in a binary.
> What should be in the FAQ on this subject? Here's what I have so far:
>
> Q: How can I embed PostgreSQL in a binary?
>
> A: You can't. PostgreSQL is designed from the ground up to run as
Folks,
I just got yet another question about embedding Postgres in a binary.
What should be in the FAQ on this subject? Here's what I have so far:
Q: How can I embed PostgreSQL in a binary?
A: You can't. PostgreSQL is designed from the ground up to run as a
separate set of processes on a ser
24 matches
Mail list logo
