Thread: PostgreSQL Replication Server licensing
What licensing restrictions apply to the recently announced PostgreSQL Replication Server 1.2? How does this project relate to the main PostgreSQL effort? -- Ron Peterson -o) Network & Systems Manager /\\ Mount Holyoke College _\_v http://www.mtholyoke.edu/~rpeterso ----
Ron Peterson wrote: > What licensing restrictions apply to the recently announced PostgreSQL > Replication Server 1.2? How does this project relate to the main > PostgreSQL effort? Hi Ron, The main website for eRServer is www.erserver.com, and it's a well tested PostgreSQL database product by PostgreSQL, Inc. (www.pgsql.com). It's not available as Open Source yet, although it will definitely be released to the main PostgreSQL Community in about 23 months or so from now. For licensing, when you become a PostgreSQL, Inc. Gold or Platinum level client, you gain the right to use eRServer in your business and install it wherever necessary (no restriction on internal usage). Hope that helps. :-) Regards and best wishes, Justin Clift -- "My grandfather once told me that there are two kinds of people: those who work and those who take the credit. He told me to try to be in the first group; there was less competition there." - Indira Gandhi
On Monday February 3 2003 11:42, Justin Clift wrote: > Ron Peterson wrote: > > What licensing restrictions apply to the recently announced > > PostgreSQL Replication Server 1.2? How does this project relate > > to the main PostgreSQL effort? >... > It's not available as Open Source yet, although it will definitely > be released to the main PostgreSQL Community in about 23 months or > so from now. Can you clarify what you mean by Open Source here? Specifically... Are you saying customer source code access is not included with the $10000 or $20000 support packages? Are you saying source code access will be included in a couple of years in those packages? Are you saying you all intend to release the source to the community even if one does not purchase a support package, ala current Pgsql source code accessibility? Thanks, Ed
I'm trying to script some updates to system tables, and I can't figure out how to detect an error condition in the SQL sent to psql. Is there anyway to test for errors returned by psql? For example: echo "select foo from pg_database" | psql -U admin myDB || echo "failed" && echo "success" This doesn't work. Neither "failed" nor "success" are echoed. Only 'ERROR: Attribute "foo" not found' is displayed on console. Alternatively, is there a way to do this as a single transaction, that will rollback if any statement fails? (Without installing PL/pgSQL, that is.) TIA, Drew
If you do them all in one session and surround them with BEGIN and COMMIT then it'll become an all or nothing affair. On Mon, Feb 24, 2003 at 06:29:27PM -0800, Drew Wilson wrote: > I'm trying to script some updates to system tables, and I can't figure > out how to detect an error condition in the SQL sent to psql. > > Is there anyway to test for errors returned by psql? > > For example: > echo "select foo from pg_database" | psql -U admin myDB || echo > "failed" && echo "success" > > This doesn't work. Neither "failed" nor "success" are echoed. > Only 'ERROR: Attribute "foo" not found' is displayed on console. > > > Alternatively, is there a way to do this as a single transaction, that > will rollback if any statement fails? (Without installing PL/pgSQL, > that is.) > > > TIA, > > Drew > > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives? > > http://archives.postgresql.org -- Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@svana.org> http://svana.org/kleptog/ > Support bacteria! They're the only culture some people have.
Attachment
On Mon, 24 Feb 2003, Ed L. wrote: > On Monday February 3 2003 11:42, Justin Clift wrote: > > Ron Peterson wrote: > > > What licensing restrictions apply to the recently announced > > > PostgreSQL Replication Server 1.2? How does this project relate > > > to the main PostgreSQL effort? > >... > > It's not available as Open Source yet, although it will definitely > > be released to the main PostgreSQL Community in about 23 months or > > so from now. > > Can you clarify what you mean by Open Source here? Specifically... > > Are you saying customer source code access is not included with the > $10000 or $20000 support packages? Yes, you have access to full source code ... our policy is that anything that we develop will be released to the community (ie. put on gborg) within 24mos ...if, at any point, we can shorten that period of time, we will, but 24mos is our max ... right now, its *only* available through the support packages ...
Anyone have any experience with this and why it is slow -- Dave Cramer <dave@fastcrypt.com> Cramer Consulting -- Dave Cramer <Dave@micro-automation.net>
Sorry I used the wrong subject Does anybody have experience with Cache from www.intersystems.com and can say something about the differences with PostgreSQL or how it compares to PostgreSQL? Thanks Conni
Perhaps it is because the developers of phpbb build their software with mysql in mind. So any "smart trick" for mysql is used, any "smart trick" in postgresql isn't? Using postgresql as a drop-in replacement for mysql is of course a major mistake, one does need to redesign the database-model if necessary (at least check whether it suits) and remodel the logic around the queries and the queries themselves. Anyway, please do define what you mean with "slow". Is it that phpbb runs a fraction slower or multiple times? Regards, Arjen > -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- > Van: pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org > [mailto:pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org] Namens Dave Cramer > Verzonden: donderdag 27 februari 2003 18:49 > Aan: pgsql-general@postgresql.org > Onderwerp: [GENERAL] phpBB2 slow on postgres vs mysql ? > > > Anyone have any experience with this and why it is slow > > > -- > Dave Cramer <dave@fastcrypt.com> > Cramer Consulting > -- > Dave Cramer <Dave@micro-automation.net> > > > ---------------------------(end of > broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an > appropriate subscribe-nomail command to > majordomo@postgresql.org so that your message can get through > to the mailing list cleanly >
On 27 Feb 2003, Dave Cramer wrote:
> Anyone have any experience with this and why it is slow
No indexes? Or they don't get used?
Or, they do something like:
select field1 from table1 where id=2;
for (i=0;i<countfromselect;i++){
select * from table2 where field2=field1fromabove
}
when a simple subselect or union or whatever would have worked?
Maybe they make a query like this:
select * from table where field1 in (1000 terms);
Hard to say without looking at their code.
Well, I'm just responding to someones request to convert over to mysql,
I don't use the product myself. If anyone has any experience with it,
please speak out.
Dave
On Fri, 2003-02-28 at 15:22, scott.marlowe wrote:
> On 27 Feb 2003, Dave Cramer wrote:
>
> > Anyone have any experience with this and why it is slow
>
> No indexes? Or they don't get used?
>
> Or, they do something like:
>
> select field1 from table1 where id=2;
> for (i=0;i<countfromselect;i++){
> select * from table2 where field2=field1fromabove
> }
>
> when a simple subselect or union or whatever would have worked?
>
> Maybe they make a query like this:
>
> select * from table where field1 in (1000 terms);
>
> Hard to say without looking at their code.
--
Dave Cramer <Dave@micro-automation.net>
Anyone have any experience with this and why it is slow -- Dave Cramer <dave@fastcrypt.com> Cramer Consulting
On 27 Feb 2003, Dave Cramer wrote: > Anyone have any experience with this and why it is slow It seems fast to me. What seems slow in it to you? i'm testing it on my box and every click is <1 second response.
On 27 Feb 2003, Dave Cramer wrote: > Anyone have any experience with this and why it is slow Are you running the latest version of phpBB or an older one? I know that at first it was a kinda "let's just get it running" when they supported postgresql, but looking through their code, it certainly looks aware of postgresql and it's transacational nature. If the whole thing is slow, maybe you have a wholly untuned postgresql database or a poor connection to it, or some other problem getting in the way? My little celeron running PHP4.2.x and hitting a remote postgresql 7.2.x server seems quite peppy running it. So, when you say slow, how slow do you mean, like 5 or 10 seconds between mouse clicks for the screen to come up, or an extra second here or there?