[GENERAL] PostgreSQL Use Report

rm, and is Yahoo! Messenger-interoperable. PostgreSQL 7 has worked well so far in the development and production environments. We'll see how it performs as usage of the system ramps up. -- Shaw Terwilliger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> SourceGear Corporation 217.356.0105 x 641 -

[GENERAL] Database Name Case Sensitivity

ay, but it makes some of my scripts more complicated. -- Shaw Terwilliger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> SourceGear Corporation 217.356.0105 x 641 ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

[GENERAL] Sluggish INSERTS with Foreign Keys (7.1beta5)

s/weeks ago? Is there anything I could do to make my im_contacts COPY happen faster? I'd like to get at least 5,000,000 rows in there for testing, but at the current rate, that could take months. -- Shaw Terwilliger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> SourceGear Corporation 217.356.0105 x 641 -

Re: [GENERAL] Re: pgsql for Python

#x27;t know what to say (never tried that). Pooling PyGreSQL connections and checking them in and out to Python threads seemed to work well. I haven't done much Python work lately, so I haven't tried PoPy (it sounds nice). -- Shaw Terwilliger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> SourceGear Corp

Re: [GENERAL] Pooling Connections with libpq

fter N uses sounds like a reasonable precaution though. (Hopefully my PGP signatures are correct this time.) -- Shaw Terwilliger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> SourceGear Corporation 217.356.0105 x 641 PGP signature

[GENERAL] ALTER TABLE speed (adding foreign keys)

this long, I'll just wipe the database, load the schema again (_with_ the constraints), and just let the COPY take a day or two. I'm using PostgreSQL 7.0.3 on an AMD Athlon 650 with 256 MB RAM, 500 MB swap, Linux 2.2.18. -- Shaw Terwilliger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> SourceGear Corporation 217.356.0105 x 641 PGP signature

Re: Failover (was Re: [GENERAL] PostgreSQL over NFS?)

Shaw Terwilliger wrote: > Besides dumping and COPY'ing the data into the second server, is there > another form of easy one-way replication available? My schema has just > a few simple tables (six tables, a few rows each). But these tables > may hold a few million records each

Failover (was Re: [GENERAL] PostgreSQL over NFS?)

ach. I've estimated the total data size to be somewhere around 10 GB (with WAGs for index sizes) for 5 million users. I guess COPY would work. -- Shaw Terwilliger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> SourceGear Corporation 217.356.0105 x 641 PGP signature

Re: [GENERAL] PostgreSQL over NFS?

but I've noticed episodes of cache incoherency from NFS-mounted home directories on two workstations. Running two postgresql database servers on two hosts accessing the same data space through NFS sounds like asking for corruption, and was, luckily, never suggested. -- Shaw Terwill

Re: [GENERAL] PostgreSQL over NFS?

les backups, etc.) suggested looking into NFS storage. I think he just wanted to keep his backup/restore plans simple (do it all on the network applicance) and doesn't realize how a database server reads and writes to disks, and NFS gets in the way. -- Shaw Terwilliger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [GENERAL] PostgreSQL over NFS?

t, and they've got the budget for the system). -- Shaw Terwilliger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> SourceGear Corporation 217.356.0105 x 641 PGP signature

[GENERAL] PostgreSQL over NFS?

network is probably gigabit ethernet. My first reaction is to tell them they're just crazy, and that's not how a database is intended to work, and they should buy some fast, redundant local storage. I thought I'd ask the designers and users here so I could back up my recommendatio

Re: [GENERAL] What distribution?

t. Me neither. dselect isn't meant to be used by humans, or at least not by sane ones. "apt-cache search " will let you search for packages by name and description fields, and "apt-get install " or "apt-get [-b] source " will install them (from pre-built binary or source, respectively). Graphical package browsers exist (gnome-apt, aptitude, maybe console-apt is still around). -- Shaw Terwilliger