Re: Featured Big Name Users of Postgres

2019-06-11 Thread Thomas Kellerer
Igal Sapir schrieb am 12.06.2019 um 07:58: > Andreas - unfortunately I do not recognize any of the names so it's probably > European entities that are not very popular here. But Lucee is a Swiss company, so why aren't European companies interesting? I know that Zalando (European online clothing

Re: Featured Big Name Users of Postgres

2019-06-11 Thread Igal Sapir
On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 2:11 PM Chris Travers wrote: > At Adjust GmbH we have 5-10 PB data in Postgres. > > > On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 9:28 PM Ireneusz Pluta/wp.pl wrote: > >> W dniu 2019-06-11 o 19:45, Igal Sapir pisze: >> > I'm doing a presentation about Postgres to SQL Server users this >> wee

Re: Aw: Re: pg_dump include/exclude data, was: verify checksums / CREATE DATABASE

2019-06-11 Thread Adrian Klaver
On 6/11/19 11:15 AM, Karsten Hilbert wrote: The problem I hope to protect against with this approach: the CREATE DATABASE might untaint corrupted data from a bad disk block into a good disk block virtue of doing a file level copy. I hope my reasoning isn't going astray. As I understand it chec

Re: Featured Big Name Users of Postgres

2019-06-11 Thread Chris Travers
At Adjust GmbH we have 5-10 PB data in Postgres. On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 9:28 PM Ireneusz Pluta/wp.pl wrote: > W dniu 2019-06-11 o 19:45, Igal Sapir pisze: > > I'm doing a presentation about Postgres to SQL Server users this > weekend, and I want to showcase > > some of the big names that use P

Re: Featured Big Name Users of Postgres

2019-06-11 Thread Ireneusz Pluta/wp.pl
W dniu 2019-06-11 o 19:45, Igal Sapir pisze: I'm doing a presentation about Postgres to SQL Server users this weekend, and I want to showcase some of the big names that use Postgres, e.g. MasterCard, Government agencies, Banks, etc. You might be interested in this: https://www.theguardian.com/

Re: Featured Big Name Users of Postgres

2019-06-11 Thread Andreas Kretschmer
On 11 June 2019 19:45:27 CEST, Igal Sapir wrote: >I'm doing a presentation about Postgres to SQL Server users this >weekend, >and I want to showcase some of the big names that use Postgres, e.g. >MasterCard, Government agencies, Banks, etc. > >There used to be a Wiki page of Featured Users but tha

Aw: Re: pg_dump include/exclude data, was: verify checksums / CREATE DATABASE

2019-06-11 Thread Karsten Hilbert
> > The problem I hope to protect against with this approach: the > > CREATE DATABASE might untaint corrupted data from a bad disk > > block into a good disk block virtue of doing a file level > > copy. > > > > I hope my reasoning isn't going astray. > > As I understand it checksums are done on the

Featured Big Name Users of Postgres

2019-06-11 Thread Igal Sapir
I'm doing a presentation about Postgres to SQL Server users this weekend, and I want to showcase some of the big names that use Postgres, e.g. MasterCard, Government agencies, Banks, etc. There used to be a Wiki page of Featured Users but that link is broken now. I also "found" a page about Maste

Re: pg_dump include/exclude data, was: verify checksums / CREATE DATABASE

2019-06-11 Thread Adrian Klaver
On 6/11/19 12:15 AM, Karsten Hilbert wrote: Dear Adrian, Sure, but that much depends on what (or rather, where) the "new cluster" actually is. In my case I want to make sure that - before a run of "CREATE DATABASE new TEMPLATE old" - I can be reasonable sure that the disk blocks underlying "o

Re: pg_dump include/exclude data, was: verify checksums / CREATE DATABASE

2019-06-11 Thread Karsten Hilbert
Dear Tom, On Fri, Jun 07, 2019 at 11:41:36AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > On 6/6/19 6:50 AM, Karsten Hilbert wrote: > >> The current canonical solution (?) for verifying checksums in > >> an existing database is, to may understanding, to pg_dump it > >> (to /dev/null, perhaps): > >> as that will read

Re: pg_dump include/exclude data, was: verify checksums / CREATE DATABASE

2019-06-11 Thread Karsten Hilbert
Dear Adrian, On Fri, Jun 07, 2019 at 08:02:32AM -0700, Adrian Klaver wrote: > On 6/6/19 6:50 AM, Karsten Hilbert wrote: > > The current canonical solution (?) for verifying checksums in > > an existing database is, to may understanding, to pg_dump it > > (to /dev/null, perhaps): > > > > pg_du