Re: Portable PostgreSQL - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Samik Raychaudhuri
Subject Re: Portable PostgreSQL
Date
Msg-id 4341C329.4080803@freeshell.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Portable PostgreSQL  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-general
On 10/3/2005 12:12 AM, Tom Lane wrote:

>Samik Raychaudhuri <samik@freeshell.org> writes:
>
>
>>... What I wanted is a no-trace (or minimal trace), no-admin required
>>kind of installation (I won't be able to create a non-admin user in the
>>comp), which, when I am done, I can just delete the installation
>>directory and will be clear.
>>
>>
>
>Postgres isn't really designed to be the sort of "embedded" database
>that you seem to be after.  You should look at other alternatives.
>(Berkeley DB is one possibility that's written by friends of ours ;-))
>
>In particular, you'll get zero sympathy here for any request to let the
>database run as an admin-level user.  The IPC communication structure we
>use does not allow restricting requests to just one program, and hence
>ignoring security issues is simply not a sane thing to do.
>
>            regards, tom lane
>
>
Thanks for replying Tom. I am not planning to run the DB as admin-level,
just as a normal user. I am actually ready to compromise some security
(it will run inside a local n/w, won't be exposed to internet, there are
firewall inplace etc.) against the learning curve for a new database.
Don't want to leave my favorite db I guess :-)

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: J B
Date:
Subject: Re: Integration with MS Sql Server
Next
From: Ben
Date:
Subject: Re: int values from PQExecParams in binary result mode