Patch applied. Thanks.
---
---
Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> OK, here's a final tweak then.
>
> Chris
>
> Jason Tishler wrote:
>
> > Christo
OK, here's a final tweak then.
Chris
Jason Tishler wrote:
Christopher,
On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 11:14:44PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Patch applied to CVS HEAD and 7.4CVS. Thanks.
Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
[snip]
Is that README included with the cygwin package, Jason? Because I
could
Christopher,
On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 11:14:44PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Patch applied to CVS HEAD and 7.4CVS. Thanks.
>
> Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> > [snip]
> > Is that README included with the cygwin package, Jason? Because I
> > couldn't find it in mine...?
Yes, it is currently
Patch applied to CVS HEAD and 7.4CVS. Thanks.
---
Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> Here's some improvements. I just ended up referring people to Jason's
> website for install as service, because it's a quite a long and c
Here's some improvements. I just ended up referring people to Jason's
website for install as service, because it's a quite a long and complex
process.
Is that README included with the cygwin package, Jason? Because I
couldn't find it in mine...?
Chris
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Jason Tishler wro
! 1. Set your path to use the Cygwin bin directory before the Windows
! utilities. Cygwin sort must be used in preference to Windows sort.exe.
Is the above needed during runtime too?
Can anyone see *any* use of "sort" that would warrant the above step?
Not in practice. I just dragged it alo
Jason Tishler wrote:
> Peter,
>
> On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 03:48:07PM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > Jason Tishler writes:
> > > > > ! 1. Set your path to use the Cygwin bin directory before the Windows
> > > > > ! utilities. Cygwin sort must be used in preference to Windows sort.exe.
> >
Peter,
On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 03:48:07PM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Jason Tishler writes:
> > > > ! 1. Set your path to use the Cygwin bin directory before the Windows
> > > > ! utilities. Cygwin sort must be used in preference to Windows sort.exe.
> >
> > Is the above needed during r
Christopher,
On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 10:18:14PM +0800, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> >The default will not work for all users.
>
> Why not? I tried it on a couple of machines... I particularly noted
> that it now installs cygipc by default..
The user may be behind a firewall, so the default
! 1. Set your path to use the Cygwin bin directory before the Windows
! utilities. Cygwin sort must be used in preference to Windows sort.exe.
Is the above needed during runtime too?
Can anyone see *any* use of "sort" that would warrant the above step?
I have no idea. I just left that in
Jason Tishler writes:
> > > ! 1. Set your path to use the Cygwin bin directory before the Windows
> > > ! utilities. Cygwin sort must be used in preference to Windows sort.exe.
>
> Is the above needed during runtime too?
Can anyone see *any* use of "sort" that would warrant the above step?
The phrase "Cygwin set of DLLs" is more accurate. Actually, the phrase
"appropriate subset of Cygwin DLLs" is even better.
Ok.
! 2. Proceed through the Cygwin install wizard. Choose 'Install from
! Internet', specify a Local Package Directory and choose a mirror
! site that's close to
Christopher,
On Sat, Nov 08, 2003 at 10:47:45PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > ! PostgreSQL requires the Cygwin set of libraries to be installed in
^^^
> > ! order that it functions under Windows.
The phrase "Cygwin set of DLLs" is more accurate.
Patch applied to 7.4 and HEAD. Thanks.
---
Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> I have attached a more comprehensive MSWIN FAQ patch. Basically, the
> instructions were way out of date and incorrect. Installing Postgres
>
I have attached a more comprehensive MSWIN FAQ patch. Basically, the
instructions were way out of date and incorrect. Installing Postgres
from Cygwin is easier these days than the FAQ would imply.
This patch already includes Andrew's previous patch.
Chris
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
Tom Lane wr
Tom Lane wrote:
"Andrew Dunstan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Well, I posted the note last night but I finished the patch today, because
it was very simple and took so little time.
I've committed this with the later revision about the warning message,
and some other minor cleanups. I add
"Andrew Dunstan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Well, I posted the note last night but I finished the patch today, because
> it was very simple and took so little time.
I've committed this with the later revision about the warning message,
and some other minor cleanups. I added documentation in th
"Andrew Dunstan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Well, I posted the note last night but I finished the patch today, because
> it was very simple and took so little time.
> I think this does what you suggested.
> If it's accepted I'll do a doc patch to match.
It looks okay to me, modulo the later sug
Andrew,
On Wed, Oct 29, 2003 at 11:34:34AM -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> I don't want to issue a warning on a setting that is likely to succeed
> in some cases. How about this instead of what I had - it deals with
> the most likely problem case?:
>
> # --
> # warn of cygwin likely failur
Jason Tishler wrote:
Andrew,
On Wed, Oct 29, 2003 at 08:45:30AM -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
The number isn't hardcoded at all
Understood.
(except for the warning on gygwin if you choose some high value)
The above is my concern -- sorry, for being unclear.
I don't want to issue
Andrew,
On Wed, Oct 29, 2003 at 08:45:30AM -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> The number isn't hardcoded at all
Understood.
> (except for the warning on gygwin if you choose some high value)
The above is my concern -- sorry, for being unclear.
> - you can choose whatever value you like at run time
ginal Message -
From: "Jason Tishler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Andrew Dunstan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "PG Patches" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2003 8:40 AM
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] "make check" improvement for cyg
Andrew,
> > > Something like this?
> > > make MAX_CONNECTIONS=10 check
AFAICT, non-server Windows versions have a listen backlog of 5:
http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/Q127/1/44.asp
http://216.239.57.104/search?q=cache:Ll4KYYj_BB8J:www.microsoft.com/windows2000/docs/
- Original Message -
From: "Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Andrew Dunstan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "PG Patches" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, October 27, 2003 11:12 PM
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] "make check" improvement
"Andrew Dunstan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Something like this?
> make MAX_CONNECTIONS=10 check
> Maybe in the case of cygwin, where it is almost bound to fail without such
> restrictions, we could put out a warning if it isn't used.
That works for me. Possibly you should pop this proposa
- Original Message -
From: "Tom Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Andrew Dunstan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "PG Patches" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, October 27, 2003 7:41 PM
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] "make check" improvement
"Andrew Dunstan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The attached patch limits parallelism for "make check" on cygwin to 10 - me=
> aning that at least on my installation "make check" actually succeeds at la=
> st.
If we're going to do something like that, I'd rather see it exposed as a
more general "at
The attached patch limits parallelism for "make
check" on cygwin to 10 - meaning that at least on my installation "make check"
actually succeeds at last.
cheers
andrew
pg_regress.patch
Description: Binary data
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP
28 matches
Mail list logo
