> Hello, I am very new to postgreSQL I am using the win32
> platform is there a website URL that has Sample Client Apps
> written for win32?
>
> I need Samples of very basic things like:
>
> Connect to a db on a remote server
> create new db
> create table
> add records
> drop records
>
> ect.
> > The way to do it is to deinstall the old version. What's
> the problem
> > with that? (it won't remove your data!)
>
> Well, maybe you're right. But why do that guys call it
> upgrade if it doesn't upgrade!? I thought the purpose of
> updating mechanism was easyness of upgrades.
It usuall
Hi Magnus,
thanks for your answer.
> The way to do it is to deinstall the old version. What's the problem
> with that? (it won't remove your data!)
Well, maybe you're right. But why do that guys call it upgrade if it
doesn't upgrade!? I thought the purpose of updating mechanism was
easyness of u
> Hi folks at pgsql.admin,
>
> I've Postgres 8.0.1 running natively under Windows XPpro SP2.
> I would like to update to 8.0.3 using the upgrade-batchfile
> coming with the zipped download file.
> The installation stops when trying to install the service,
> saying the Postgres 8.0 Database Serv
> > Can Postgres run in Windows 95 or Windows 98?
It can run with Cygwin 1.1.x which is the current release. There were
problems with Cygwin B20.
Dan
> You can run PostgreSQL on Windows NT using the Cygwin
> toolkit, but getting
> that to work can sometimes be a final project as well.
I disagree. Using the instructions on
http://people.freebsd.org/~kevlo/postgres/portNT.html it is almost a
no-brainer.
Joost Kraaijeveld
Askesis B.V.
Molukkenst
carolina writes:
> Can Postgres run in Windows 95 or Windows 98?
No. (You can compile the client library on Windows 95/98, but that's it.)
You can run PostgreSQL on Windows NT using the Cygwin toolkit, but getting
that to work can sometimes be a final project as well.
My advice would be to fi
Hi,
You would see my page about PostgreSQL 7.0.3 on WinNT:
http://people.freebsd.org/~kevlo/postgres/portNT.html
- Kevin
Dan Wilson wrote:
> >From an earlier posting last week:
>
> --
> Sorry for the website is not access
