Thread: Rant to the guiding lights of Postgres
I am evaluating Postgres for an existing Java application. I already have the app running with Oracle ($$$) and Sybase (oooold!) and I am trying to convince my management that it is worth going fully open source. (We already use Java, JBoss, Eclipse etc.) But the problem I am having, and it seems I am not alone, is the absence of Client support in postgres. I can fully understand why the db server is Linux/Unix as this covers the majority of servers used for enterprise applications, but I can not understand the abscence of platform support for the client software. Where is the Mac psql, or the Win XP version of pg_dumpall? Clients do not use Linux boxes, they use Wintel or Mac boxes. You do not have to like it, but ignoring them doesn't make them go away. I do not need the fancy GUI interfaces like PGExplorer, they are nice, and handy to port my scripts and test my stored procedures, but I can't use them to automate the creation of my database. Sybase had iSQL for scripts and bcp for data loading. Oracle had sqlplus and sqlldr. These are the basic client side tools required to automate the setup and maintence of a non-trival database, and they are available on almost any platform you care to name. And before anybody suggests I use Cygwin, I have used Cygwin, I do not like it (mild understatement) and nor am I prepared to learn Tcl just to run a script that already works. Run a script to load a telnet session to run a script to run my script? Be serious. Please, guys. Open source is the way to go. We need to convince accountants that it is the sensible, safe and cheap way to develop software. But that means we have to do our jobs! When we write client-server systems, write the clients as well as the servers. Can it really be that difficult to write a native mode psql? Have you considered doing it in Java? _________________________________________________________________ Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
Paul, > I am evaluating Postgres for an existing Java application. I already have > the app running with Oracle ($$$) and Sybase (oooold!) and I am trying to > convince my management that it is worth going fully open source. (We already <snip> > or the Win XP version of pg_dumpall? Clients do not use Linux boxes, they > use Wintel or Mac boxes. You do not have to like it, but ignoring them > doesn't make them go away. What makes you think that these things aren't under development, or already exisiting? Have you done any research at all, even asked questions on a mailing list? This is an Open Source project, Paul. If you really cared, you would offer to help, or at least ask for help, instead of posting a useless and poorly-researched rant. Money, code, and other forms of assistance to get the features you want are welcome; desctructive criticism is a waste of everyone's time. -- -Josh Berkus Aglio Database Solutions San Francisco
So the counter to this of course is "Hey Paul, we'll give you a complete
database server for free to replace your existing databases and save you
tons and tons of $$$, and all we ask in return is that you write a small
terminal program for your OS and donate it back." That sure sounds
like a good trade to me, don't you think?
In reality though I'm pretty sure that psql and pg_dumpall do compile
under Win32 and MacOS, if not under 7.4 then certainly under 7.5, so
really these options are already available to you, they are just not in
a pretty package. (hey, let me CC one of the developers in case not...)
Now, if you want to help by compiling the client programs and wrapping
them up into a nice one click install for windows users (or mac users)
we have project space available on gborg.postgresql.org you're more than
welcome to use. Otherwise you'll have to wait for someone else to decide
they want to maintain such a thing, and no one has stepped up yet
(though it has been discussed before)
Robert Treat
On Wed, 2004-02-11 at 08:58, Paul Smith wrote:
> I am evaluating Postgres for an existing Java application. I already have
> the app running with Oracle ($$$) and Sybase (oooold!) and I am trying to
> convince my management that it is worth going fully open source. (We already
> use Java, JBoss, Eclipse etc.) But the problem I am having, and it seems I
> am not alone, is the absence of Client support in postgres. I can fully
> understand why the db server is Linux/Unix as this covers the majority of
> servers used for enterprise applications, but I can not understand the
> abscence of platform support for the client software. Where is the Mac psql,
> or the Win XP version of pg_dumpall? Clients do not use Linux boxes, they
> use Wintel or Mac boxes. You do not have to like it, but ignoring them
> doesn't make them go away.
>
> I do not need the fancy GUI interfaces like PGExplorer, they are nice, and
> handy to port my scripts and test my stored procedures, but I can't use them
> to automate the creation of my database.
>
> Sybase had iSQL for scripts and bcp for data loading. Oracle had sqlplus and
> sqlldr. These are the basic client side tools required to automate the setup
> and maintence of a non-trival database, and they are available on almost any
> platform you care to name.
>
> And before anybody suggests I use Cygwin, I have used Cygwin, I do not like
> it (mild understatement) and nor am I prepared to learn Tcl just to run a
> script that already works. Run a script to load a telnet session to run a
> script to run my script? Be serious.
>
> Please, guys. Open source is the way to go. We need to convince accountants
> that it is the sensible, safe and cheap way to develop software. But that
> means we have to do our jobs! When we write client-server systems, write the
> clients as well as the servers.
>
> Can it really be that difficult to write a native mode psql? Have you
> considered doing it in Java?
>
--
Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
Paul Smith wrote: > Can it really be that difficult to write a native mode psql? Not only is it not difficult, it has already been done. http://www.postgresql.org/docs/7.4/static/install-win32.html
Paul Smith wrote:
> I am evaluating Postgres for an existing Java application. I already have
> the app running with Oracle ($$$) and Sybase (oooold!) and I am trying to
> convince my management that it is worth going fully open source. (We already
> use Java, JBoss, Eclipse etc.) But the problem I am having, and it seems I
> am not alone, is the absence of Client support in postgres. I can fully
> understand why the db server is Linux/Unix as this covers the majority of
> servers used for enterprise applications, but I can not understand the
> abscence of platform support for the client software. Where is the Mac psql,
> or the Win XP version of pg_dumpall? Clients do not use Linux boxes, they
> use Wintel or Mac boxes. You do not have to like it, but ignoring them
> doesn't make them go away.
>
> I do not need the fancy GUI interfaces like PGExplorer, they are nice, and
> handy to port my scripts and test my stored procedures, but I can't use them
> to automate the creation of my database.
>
> Sybase had iSQL for scripts and bcp for data loading. Oracle had sqlplus and
> sqlldr. These are the basic client side tools required to automate the setup
> and maintence of a non-trival database, and they are available on almost any
> platform you care to name.
>
> And before anybody suggests I use Cygwin, I have used Cygwin, I do not like
> it (mild understatement) and nor am I prepared to learn Tcl just to run a
> script that already works. Run a script to load a telnet session to run a
> script to run my script? Be serious.
>
> Please, guys. Open source is the way to go. We need to convince accountants
> that it is the sensible, safe and cheap way to develop software. But that
> means we have to do our jobs! When we write client-server systems, write the
> clients as well as the servers.
>
> Can it really be that difficult to write a native mode psql? Have you
> considered doing it in Java?
We have a psql native on the win32 project page:
http://momjian.postgresql.org/main/writings/pgsql/project
but I would recompile it myself and the other apps. If you download
7.4.1 and install MinGW/Msys as outlined on that page, you will see that
all the client apps compile just fine and make native win32 binaries.
7.5 will have a native win32 server as well.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
>In reality though I'm pretty sure that psql and pg_dumpall do compile >under Win32 and MacOS, if not under 7.4 then certainly under 7.5, so >really these options are already available to you, they are just not in >a pretty package. (hey, let me CC one of the developers in >case not...) It's there for win32 in HEAD. Doesn't quite work (can't find pg_dump, need some tweaks for that). pg_dump, however, works fine (at least it works on my test databases. But it *is* a dev version.) //Magnus
On Wed, 11 Feb 2004, Paul Smith wrote: > I am evaluating Postgres for an existing Java application. I already have > the app running with Oracle ($$$) and Sybase (oooold!) and I am trying to > convince my management that it is worth going fully open source. (We already > use Java, JBoss, Eclipse etc.) But the problem I am having, and it seems I > am not alone, is the absence of Client support in postgres. I can fully > understand why the db server is Linux/Unix as this covers the majority of > servers used for enterprise applications, but I can not understand the > abscence of platform support for the client software. Where is the Mac psql, > or the Win XP version of pg_dumpall? Clients do not use Linux boxes, they > use Wintel or Mac boxes. You do not have to like it, but ignoring them > doesn't make them go away. > > I do not need the fancy GUI interfaces like PGExplorer, they are nice, and > handy to port my scripts and test my stored procedures, but I can't use them > to automate the creation of my database. > > Sybase had iSQL for scripts and bcp for data loading. Oracle had sqlplus and > sqlldr. These are the basic client side tools required to automate the setup > and maintence of a non-trival database, and they are available on almost any > platform you care to name. > > And before anybody suggests I use Cygwin, I have used Cygwin, I do not like > it (mild understatement) and nor am I prepared to learn Tcl just to run a > script that already works. Run a script to load a telnet session to run a > script to run my script? Be serious. > > Please, guys. Open source is the way to go. We need to convince accountants > that it is the sensible, safe and cheap way to develop software. But that > means we have to do our jobs! When we write client-server systems, write the > clients as well as the servers. > > Can it really be that difficult to write a native mode psql? Have you > considered doing it in Java? Already being worked on, and we hope to have this ready for 7.5 ... ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email: scrappy@hub.org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664
Paul,
There will be a complete native Windows port of PostgreSQL - this will
include the frontend stuff as well.
There are nice GUI frontends for PostgreSQL and other databases. If you
like you can use Squirrel, for instance. It supports "all" databases.
Also, pgadmin3 is nice.
Best regards,
Hans
Paul Smith wrote:
> I am evaluating Postgres for an existing Java application. I already
> have the app running with Oracle ($$$) and Sybase (oooold!) and I am
> trying to convince my management that it is worth going fully open
> source. (We already use Java, JBoss, Eclipse etc.) But the problem I am
> having, and it seems I am not alone, is the absence of Client support in
> postgres. I can fully understand why the db server is Linux/Unix as this
> covers the majority of servers used for enterprise applications, but I
> can not understand the abscence of platform support for the client
> software. Where is the Mac psql, or the Win XP version of pg_dumpall?
> Clients do not use Linux boxes, they use Wintel or Mac boxes. You do not
> have to like it, but ignoring them doesn't make them go away.
>
> I do not need the fancy GUI interfaces like PGExplorer, they are nice,
> and handy to port my scripts and test my stored procedures, but I can't
> use them to automate the creation of my database.
>
> Sybase had iSQL for scripts and bcp for data loading. Oracle had sqlplus
> and sqlldr. These are the basic client side tools required to automate
> the setup and maintence of a non-trival database, and they are available
> on almost any platform you care to name.
>
> And before anybody suggests I use Cygwin, I have used Cygwin, I do not
> like it (mild understatement) and nor am I prepared to learn Tcl just to
> run a script that already works. Run a script to load a telnet session
> to run a script to run my script? Be serious.
>
> Please, guys. Open source is the way to go. We need to convince
> accountants that it is the sensible, safe and cheap way to develop
> software. But that means we have to do our jobs! When we write
> client-server systems, write the clients as well as the servers.
>
> Can it really be that difficult to write a native mode psql? Have you
> considered doing it in Java?
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8.
> http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
--
Cybertec Geschwinde u Schoenig
Schoengrabern 134, A-2020 Hollabrunn, Austria
Tel: +43/2952/30706 or +43/664/233 90 75
www.cybertec.at, www.postgresql.at, kernel.cybertec.at
Robert Treat wrote: > In reality though I'm pretty sure that psql and pg_dumpall do compile > under Win32 and MacOS, if not under 7.4 then certainly under 7.5, so > really these options are already available to you, they are just not in > a pretty package. I can attest that psql does under Windows XP - I'm looking at it right now.
Paul Smith wrote: > Where is the Mac psql For Mac OS X, just compile the whole kit and caboodle natively. I've got PostgreSQL 7.4.1 running on Mac OS X 10.3 (Panther)- on an iMac 333Mhz (Strawberry). It's great - even I was able to compile it straight out of the box! Of course, Mac OS X is a Unix-like environment, so it's nowhere near the same as Mac OS 9. Under Mac OS 9 there is no commandline available, so one option I'd suggest is using a terminal package like NCSA Telnet or its successor MacTelnet[1].Once you have a terminal package, use it to open a shell on the DB server or a machine that has the client softwareavailable. HTH Alex [1] http://homepage.mac.com/kmg/mactelnet/
psql works on Mac, I use it all the time. On Feb 12, 2004, at 1:56 PM, Ned Lilly wrote: > Robert Treat wrote: > >> In reality though I'm pretty sure that psql and pg_dumpall do compile >> under Win32 and MacOS, if not under 7.4 then certainly under 7.5, so >> really these options are already available to you, they are just not >> in >> a pretty package. > > I can attest that psql does under Windows XP - I'm looking at it right > now. > > ---------------------------(end of > broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend >
There isn't a .mak file for pg_dumpall, nor for any client program except psql as far as I can see. In fact, the nightmare difficulties of keeping MS type makefiles in sync with our GNU type makefiles is one of the big reasons that we chose to adopt MinGW instead as the supported build environment for the native Windows port.
With the Win32 port there will be native Windows versions of all programs. It would certainly make sense to have a "clients only" Windows install package, as well as a "server+clients" package - although I am not working on the packaging. I have no knowledge about Mac clients, although I believe the full range of programs work on OS-X.
You might be able to get someone (e.g. me :-) ) to work for $$$ making packaged Windows binaries of other 7.4.1 client apps, assuming it is possible, if they are required before the next release. I doubt anyone will work on it otherwise - those of us interested in Windows apps are concentrating on the full Windows port.
My own solution to the problem, if I am using a non-Unix workstation, is usually to connect to a Unix box (via ssh and/or VNC) and run the required client from there. That plus Samba and/or NFS allow me to put things where I want and run them where I can.
My own opinion is that Cygwin is usually fine for client use such as this - I agree that I wouldn't run it for production server use.
cheers
andrew
Robert Treat wrote:
So the counter to this of course is "Hey Paul, we'll give you a complete database server for free to replace your existing databases and save you tons and tons of $$$, and all we ask in return is that you write a small terminal program for your OS and donate it back." That sure sounds like a good trade to me, don't you think? In reality though I'm pretty sure that psql and pg_dumpall do compile under Win32 and MacOS, if not under 7.4 then certainly under 7.5, so really these options are already available to you, they are just not in a pretty package. (hey, let me CC one of the developers in case not...) Now, if you want to help by compiling the client programs and wrapping them up into a nice one click install for windows users (or mac users) we have project space available on gborg.postgresql.org you're more than welcome to use. Otherwise you'll have to wait for someone else to decide they want to maintain such a thing, and no one has stepped up yet (though it has been discussed before) Robert Treat On Wed, 2004-02-11 at 08:58, Paul Smith wrote:I am evaluating Postgres for an existing Java application. I already have the app running with Oracle ($$$) and Sybase (oooold!) and I am trying to convince my management that it is worth going fully open source. (We already use Java, JBoss, Eclipse etc.) But the problem I am having, and it seems I am not alone, is the absence of Client support in postgres. I can fully understand why the db server is Linux/Unix as this covers the majority of servers used for enterprise applications, but I can not understand the abscence of platform support for the client software. Where is the Mac psql, or the Win XP version of pg_dumpall? Clients do not use Linux boxes, they use Wintel or Mac boxes. You do not have to like it, but ignoring them doesn't make them go away. I do not need the fancy GUI interfaces like PGExplorer, they are nice, and handy to port my scripts and test my stored procedures, but I can't use them to automate the creation of my database. Sybase had iSQL for scripts and bcp for data loading. Oracle had sqlplus and sqlldr. These are the basic client side tools required to automate the setup and maintence of a non-trival database, and they are available on almost any platform you care to name. And before anybody suggests I use Cygwin, I have used Cygwin, I do not like it (mild understatement) and nor am I prepared to learn Tcl just to run a script that already works. Run a script to load a telnet session to run a script to run my script? Be serious. Please, guys. Open source is the way to go. We need to convince accountants that it is the sensible, safe and cheap way to develop software. But that means we have to do our jobs! When we write client-server systems, write the clients as well as the servers. Can it really be that difficult to write a native mode psql? Have you considered doing it in Java?