You can also use stunnel for SSL. Preferable to having SSL in postgresql
I'd think.
Cheerio,
Link.
At 03:38 PM 3/16/02 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>FWIW, I was not in favor of the SSL addition either, since (just as you
>say) it does nothing that couldn't be done with an SSH tunnel. If I had
--
http://freshmeat.net/articles/view/426/
This article is quite poorly written. I dare say that I expected more from
people who run a site associated with the categorisation of software (how
can one discuss MySQL, Oracle, Postgres and Access in the same article?).
By point of reference, however, I
Greg Copeland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Except we seemingly don't see eye to eye on it. SSH just is not very
> useful in many situations simply because it may not always be
> available. Now, bring Win32 platforms into the mix and SSH really isn't
> an option at all...not without bringing ext
I believe we've now committed fixes for all the "must fix" items there
were for 7.2.1. Does anyone have any reasons to hold up 7.2.1 more,
or are we ready to go?
regards, tom lane
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: if posting/
Tom Lane wrote:
> I believe we've now committed fixes for all the "must fix" items there
> were for 7.2.1. Does anyone have any reasons to hold up 7.2.1 more,
> or are we ready to go?
I need to brand 7.2.1 --- will do tomorrow.
--
Bruce Momjian| http://candle.pha.pa.
Attached is a pacth against 7.2 which adds locale awareness to the
character classes of the regular expression engine. Please consider
including this feature to postgreSQL.
Regards,
Manuel.
*** src/backend/regex/regcomp.c.org Sun Mar 17 16:39:13 2002
--- src/backend/regex/regcomp.c Sun Mar 17 1
- Original Message -
From: "Lance Ellinghaus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, March 16, 2002 6:54 AM
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] User Level Lock question
> I know it does not sound like something that would need to be done, but
h
On Fri, 15 Mar 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> Vince Vielhaber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Fri, 15 Mar 2002, Thomas Lockhart wrote:
> >> But I *really* don't see the benefit of that (.)
> >> syntax. Especially when it cannot (?? we need a counterexample) lead to
> >> any additional interesting ben
I need to do some timezone manipulation, and I was wondering about this
difference:
australia=# select version();
version
--
PostgreSQL 7.1.3 on i386--freebsd4.4, compiled by GCC 2.95.3
(1 row)
australia=# sel
Andrew Sullivan wrote:
>
> On Sat, Mar 16, 2002 at 09:01:28AM -0500, mlw wrote:
>
> > "If it is mostly static data, why not just make it a static page?"
> > Because a static page is a maintenance nightmare. One uses a
> > database in a web site to allow content to be changed and upgraded
> > dyn
Greg Copeland wrote:
>
> On Sat, 2002-03-16 at 08:36, mlw wrote:
> > Triggers and asynchronous notification are not substitutes for real hard ACID
> > complient caching. The way you suggest implies only one access model. Take
the
> > notion of a library, they have both web and application access.
I think the notion that data is managed outside of the database is bogus. Query
caching can improve performance in some specific, but popular, scenarios.
Saying it does not belong within the database and is the job of the
application, is like saying file caching is not a job of the file system but
12 matches
Mail list logo
