Martha Stewart called it a Good Thing when [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Scott Marlowe)
wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-01-05 at 15:54, Raymond O'Donnell wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Would there be any problem with using Slony-I to replicate from a
>> Windows server to Linux? Has anyone done this?
It otta work...
>> Al
On 1/5/07, Jorge Godoy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Andrew Chernow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> And how do you guarantee that after a failure? You're restoring two
>> different sets of data here:
>
>> How do you link them together on that specific operation? Or even on a daily
>> basis, if you
Is there any overwhelming reason you can't just stick an apache server
on your DB server? Unless you expect this thing to get hit *hard*, the
performance of having them both on the same machine is pretty acceptable
(I know, everyone's opinion about what constitutes heavy usage
differs). If th
"Thomas F. O'Connell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Michael Best <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>> Set your memory requirement too high in postgresql.conf, reload
>>> instead of restarting the database, it silently fails sometime later?
> Wait, now I'm curious. If a change in postgresql.conf that
On Jan 5, 2007, at 10:01 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Michael Best <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Set your memory requirement too high in postgresql.conf, reload
instead
of restarting the database, it silently fails sometime later?
Yeah, wouldn't surprise me, since the reload is going to ignore any
ch
> I wonder why this HTTP cache headers argument didn't surface in this
> heated debate.
I mentioned this earlier as well. Although you could do it in the app
layer - it would be easier to just let the web server handle it.
---(end of broadcast)---
On 1/6/07, Jorge Godoy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Andrew Chernow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>I mean, how do you handle integrity with data
>> outside the database?
> You don't, the file system handles integrity of the stored data. Although,
> one must careful to avoid db and fs orphans. Mean
2007/1/6, Andrew Chernow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>>apache has very good page and image caching. You could take advantage
>>>of that using this technique.
> I wonder why this HTTP cache headers argument didn't surface in this
> heated debate.
I did other up this argument by the way.
Sorry,
2007/1/5, Jorge Godoy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Andrew Chernow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> meet those requirements. It is far more effecient to have apache access
> them
Where weren't we meeting his/her requirements? All the discussion is around
available means to do that. One option is having t
Clodoaldo wrote:
> 5 Jan 2007 06:59:18 -0800, imageguy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >
> > I think I know the answer,
>
> If you know the answer please tell it as I have read some discussions
> on the web and although I have decided on a solution I'm still not
> sure about the best answer, if there is a
Scott Marlowe wrote:
On Fri, 2007-01-05 at 16:19, Geoffrey wrote:
Geoffrey wrote:
We had a vacuum fail recently with the following error:
invalid page header in block 846 of relation "move_pkey"
Anyone have an idea what could cause this problem and what we need to do
to resolve it?
Runnin
11 matches
Mail list logo
