Thread: PGdump then PHP search
Hi all-
I've transferred a database using a pg_dump, and everything transferred fine. But in my search engine (made with PHP3 performing SQL queries using: WHERE fieldname LIKE keywords) the only documents that seem to be searched are the ones that I've put in SINCE the pg_dump/db transfer.
Any ideas why?
Any way to fix it?
Mike
Mike, If you query the new database with psql, can you see the transfered records, or only the new records? If not, you missed some step in transfering the data (like copy). Troy > > This is a multi-part message in MIME format. > > ------=_NextPart_000_0072_01BF0056.F839FAC0 > Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="iso-8859-1" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > > Hi all- > > I've transferred a database using a pg_dump, and everything transferred = > fine. But in my search engine (made with PHP3 performing SQL queries = > using: WHERE fieldname LIKE keywords) the only documents that seem to be = > searched are the ones that I've put in SINCE the pg_dump/db transfer. > > Any ideas why? > Any way to fix it? > > Mike > mike@fieldco.com > > > ------=_NextPart_000_0072_01BF0056.F839FAC0 > Content-Type: text/html; > charset="iso-8859-1" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > > <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN"> > <HTML> > <HEAD> > > <META content=3Dtext/html;charset=3Diso-8859-1 = > http-equiv=3DContent-Type> > <META content=3D'"MSHTML 4.72.3110.7"' name=3DGENERATOR> > </HEAD> > <BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff> > <DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2> <FONT = > color=3D#000000>Hi=20 > all-</FONT></FONT></DIV> > <DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2><FONT = > color=3D#000000></FONT></FONT> </DIV> > <DIV><FONT size=3D2>I've transferred a database using a pg_dump, and = > everything=20 > transferred fine. But in my search engine (made with PHP3 = > performing SQL=20 > queries using: WHERE fieldname LIKE keywords) the only documents that = > seem to be=20 > searched are the ones that I've put in SINCE the pg_dump/db=20 > transfer.</FONT></DIV> > <DIV><FONT size=3D2></FONT> </DIV> > <DIV><FONT size=3D2>Any ideas why?</FONT></DIV> > <DIV><FONT size=3D2>Any way to fix it?</FONT></DIV> > <DIV><FONT size=3D2></FONT> </DIV> > <DIV><FONT size=3D2>Mike</FONT></DIV> > <DIV><FONT size=3D2><A=20 > href=3D"mailto:mike@fieldco.com">mike@fieldco.com</A></FONT></DIV> > <DIV> </DIV></BODY></HTML> > > ------=_NextPart_000_0072_01BF0056.F839FAC0-- > > > ************ > >
a while back tom lane, i think , mentioned something about freebsd being the best in terms of file system performance based on the fact linux 's ext2 has some sort of paging /memory handling issues? i was wondering if anyone has any numbers on this sort of thing? and what about scsi/eide/raid?
Clayton Cottingham writes: > a while back > > tom lane, i think , > mentioned something about > freebsd being the best in terms of file system performance > > based on the fact linux 's ext2 has some sort of paging /memory handling > issues? > > i was wondering if anyone has any numbers on this sort of thing? FreeBSD has always supported files larger than 2G. Last I saw with Linux it was still a matter of "pick your favorite patch set, each has its strengths and weaknesses." I used to deal with a lot of files larger than 2G. > and what about scsi/eide/raid? If performance (other than $/GB) is an issue, xIDE is eliminated. Altho FreeBSD does handle IDE HD's, and UDMA IDE. And offers at least two ways to combine multiple drives into a larger filesystem. RAID5 was recently added to the CVS archive (not sure if it made its way into this week's FreeBSD 3.3 release.) FreeBSD's Adaptec driver is probably the premier example of what Adaptec's hardware can do. Last I heard FreeBSD's Adaptec driver is ported to Linux and is the default Adaptec driver in most (or all?) Linux distributions. This may be diverging as FreeBSD has changed its storage device paradigm to CAM, and the FreeBSD SCSI drivers were the first to be changed/re-written. The FreeBSD NCR/Symbios SCSI driver appears to be developed elsewhere (Linux? NetBSD? OpenBSD) and ported back into FreeBSD. I have found FreeBSD to be a superior alternative to Linux. FreeBSD lacks the hype and political agenda of Linux. FreeBSD is slower to support every oddball Windows gee-gaw than Linux. FreeBSD's "ports" system is simple, elegant, works, and is stable, unlike RPM. Having a mirror of the FreeBSD CVS archive has been quite useful too. It makes monitoring the changes to FreeBSD (including ports and documentation) possible. The specific question was about PostgreSQL under FreeBSD. I've never stressed PostgreSQL under FreeBSD so I can't specifically answer that question. But I have stressed FreeBSD in other ways where it held its head up high with Sun and SGI machines, and Linux didn't. YMMV. Speaking of ports, in my previous employment, I found FreeBSD's /usr/ports/ collection of 2000+ utilities to be the best source to search for utilities and applications for the Sun and SGI systems. I could find something that looks useful, painlessly download and try it, and if it passed muster I already had the source code to move to the other systems. And already had a working version under FreeBSD to compare the ported Sun and SGI versions. This is where I discovered PostgreSQL. -- David Kelly N4HHE, dkelly@nospam.hiwaay.net ===================================================================== The human mind ordinarily operates at only ten percent of its capacity -- the rest is overhead for the operating system.