Thread: delivering database stand-alone
hi all, i am planning to build a database (a dictionary in fact) that i will eventually want to distribute on a cd (or downloadable iso). what i would like to know is if this is technically possible with postgresql. and how exactly would it be done? would i have to make postgresql run off the cd, or should it first be installed to the hard disk? (the latter would be problematic on linux, given the many different distros and their different package management systems...) how would i deal with systems that already have a postgreql server or (more difficult perhaps) a different database server running? or should i not make use of postgresql (or any database server) at all for the cd? after all, the data in the database is static, users will not have to modify it, just look it up. thanks for any comments and suggestions. -- Joost Kremers Life has its moments
Joost Kremers wrote: > hi all, > > i am planning to build a database (a dictionary in fact) that i will > eventually want to distribute on a cd (or downloadable iso). what i would > like to know is if this is technically possible with postgresql. and how > exactly would it be done? would i have to make postgresql run off the cd, > or should it first be installed to the hard disk? (the latter would be > problematic on linux, given the many different distros and their different > package management systems...) how would i deal with systems that already > have a postgreql server or (more difficult perhaps) a different database > server running? > > or should i not make use of postgresql (or any database server) at all for > the cd? after all, the data in the database is static, users will not have > to modify it, just look it up. > > thanks for any comments and suggestions. PostgreSQL will not run on read-only medium easily. If you vacuum full all the tables, that will prevent table writes, but we write to pg_clog even for select. -- 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
On Mon, 2003-09-01 at 05:24, Joost Kremers wrote: > hi all, > > i am planning to build a database (a dictionary in fact) that i will > eventually want to distribute on a cd (or downloadable iso). what i would > like to know is if this is technically possible with postgresql. and how > exactly would it be done? would i have to make postgresql run off the cd, > or should it first be installed to the hard disk? (the latter would be > problematic on linux, given the many different distros and their different > package management systems...) how would i deal with systems that already > have a postgreql server or (more difficult perhaps) a different database > server running? > > or should i not make use of postgresql (or any database server) at all for > the cd? after all, the data in the database is static, users will not have > to modify it, just look it up. I think I'd go with ISAM files. Simpler to relocate to any direc- tory tree. -- ----------------------------------------------------------------- Ron Johnson, Jr. ron.l.johnson@cox.net Jefferson, LA USA YODA: Code! Yes. A programmer's strength flows from code maintainability. But beware of Perl. Terse syntax... more than one way to do it...default variables. The dark side of code maintainability are they. Easily they flow, quick to join you when code you write. If once you start down the dark path, forever will it dominate your destiny, consume you it will.
Martha Stewart called it a Good Thing whenjoostkremers@fastmail.fm (Joost Kremers)wrote:
> i am planning to build a database (a dictionary in fact) that i will
> eventually want to distribute on a cd (or downloadable iso). what i
> would like to know is if this is technically possible with
> postgresql. and how exactly would it be done? would i have to make
> postgresql run off the cd, or should it first be installed to the
> hard disk? (the latter would be problematic on linux, given the many
> different distros and their different package management systems...)
> how would i deal with systems that already have a postgreql server
> or (more difficult perhaps) a different database server running?
>
> or should i not make use of postgresql (or any database server) at
> all for the cd? after all, the data in the database is static, users
> will not have to modify it, just look it up.
This sounds like a candidate for Dan Bernstein's "CDB" (Constant
DataBase) library. It builds highly efficient "compiled" hash tables,
that are intended to be treated as "read-only." (In fact, they can't
readily be updated, once compiled.)
That presents three issues:
1. It's basically doing "hash table" access; no ordering; no
approximate matches.
2. No ability to submit SQL queries.
3. Discussions of DJB's licensing arrangements tends to cause brain
haemorraging, anger, and other ills. The Debian folk have
created an alternative version that I believe is in the
public domain (e.g. - not GPL; not LGPL; possibly "freer than
the BSD License").
In contrast, read-only access to PostgreSQL databases is, while
occasionally discussed, not currently attainable. (Not, at least, in
a "burn the DB on CD" form.)
--
let name="cbbrowne" and tld="cbbrowne.com" in name ^ "@" ^ tld;;
http://www.ntlug.org/~cbbrowne/sap.html
"A crafty and lecherous old hypocrite whose very statue seems to gloat
on the wenches as they walk the States House Yard."
-- William Cobbett on Benjamin Franklin
You should check out Firebird (firebirdsql.sourceforge.net). I believe your can set databases to be read-only and when embedding, Firebird is a single DLL. Jacob On Mon, 01 Sep 2003 15:42:32 -0400, Christopher Browne <cbbrowne@acm.org> wrote: >Martha Stewart called it a Good Thing whenjoostkremers@fastmail.fm (Joost Kremers)wrote: >> i am planning to build a database (a dictionary in fact) that i will >> eventually want to distribute on a cd (or downloadable iso). what i >> would like to know is if this is technically possible with >> postgresql. and how exactly would it be done? would i have to make >> postgresql run off the cd, or should it first be installed to the >> hard disk? (the latter would be problematic on linux, given the many >> different distros and their different package management systems...) >> how would i deal with systems that already have a postgreql server >> or (more difficult perhaps) a different database server running?
> -----Original Message----- > From: Christopher Browne [mailto:cbbrowne@acm.org] > Sent: Monday, September 01, 2003 12:43 PM > To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org > Subject: Re: [GENERAL] delivering database stand-alone > > > Martha Stewart called it a Good Thing > whenjoostkremers@fastmail.fm (Joost Kremers)wrote: > > i am planning to build a database (a dictionary in fact) > that i will > > eventually want to distribute on a cd (or downloadable iso). what i > > would like to know is if this is technically possible with > postgresql. > > and how exactly would it be done? would i have to make > postgresql run > > off the cd, or should it first be installed to the hard disk? (the > > latter would be problematic on linux, given the many > different distros > > and their different package management systems...) how would i deal > > with systems that already have a postgreql server or (more > difficult > > perhaps) a different database server running? > > > > or should i not make use of postgresql (or any database > server) at all > > for the cd? after all, the data in the database is static, > users will > > not have to modify it, just look it up. > > This sounds like a candidate for Dan Bernstein's "CDB" (Constant > DataBase) library. It builds highly efficient "compiled" > hash tables, that are intended to be treated as "read-only." > (In fact, they can't readily be updated, once compiled.) > > That presents three issues: > > 1. It's basically doing "hash table" access; no ordering; no > approximate matches. > > 2. No ability to submit SQL queries. > > 3. Discussions of DJB's licensing arrangements tends to cause brain > haemorraging, anger, and other ills. The Debian folk have > created an alternative version that I believe is in the > public domain (e.g. - not GPL; not LGPL; possibly "freer than > the BSD License"). > > In contrast, read-only access to PostgreSQL databases is, > while occasionally discussed, not currently attainable. > (Not, at least, in a "burn the DB on CD" form.) Something else to consider: http://www.garret.ru/~knizhnik/databases.html All freely available and open source. They all use OO paradigm, and so will be uncomfortable for those who are not used to it.
DCorbit@connx.com ("Dann Corbit") wrote:
> Something else to consider:
> http://www.garret.ru/~knizhnik/databases.html
>
> All freely available and open source. They all use OO paradigm, and so
> will be uncomfortable for those who are not used to it.
FastDB was claimed to be really really fast. Unfortunately, it
doesn't appear as though it has seen a great deal of enhancements over
the last couple of years. It wouldn't surprise me if the recent
changes to the PG optimizer put it ahead for many cases...
--
let name="aa454" and tld="freenet.carleton.ca" in String.concat "@" [name;tld];;
http://cbbrowne.com/info/sgml.html
Rules of the Evil Overlord #221. "My force-field generators will be
located inside the shield they generate."
<http://www.eviloverlord.com/>
Bruce Momjian wrote: > PostgreSQL will not run on read-only medium easily. If you vacuum full all > the tables, that will prevent table writes, but we write to pg_clog even > for select. You could possibly create a RAM disk, mount it, and initdb, and copy the entire file needed for writing, and link from the RAM disk to the read-only medium for the data files. -- Linux homer 2.4.18-14 #1 Wed Sep 4 13:35:50 EDT 2002 i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux 8:00pm up 253 days, 11:21, 4 users, load average: 5.23, 5.16, 5.17