Dragan Zubac schrieb:
Does anybody know if there're any companies offering PostgreSQL 'hosting' ?
By 'hosting', I mean you get access to a database to which your
application connects remotely and do sql stuff.
'Hosting' company takes care of database maintenance,backup,etc.
Have a look at:
htt
On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 7:38 AM, Dragan Zubac wrote:
> Hello
>
> Does anybody know if there're any companies offering PostgreSQL 'hosting' ?
> By 'hosting', I mean you get access to a database to which your
> application connects remotely and do sql stuff.
> 'Hosting' company takes care of databas
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm sharing with 5 other small businesses a dedicated server with 60GB
hard drive, 700GB monthly bandwidth on a 10Mbps link for $49/month.
Where is this available?
server4you.net offers such a system today (they claim to be the largest
dedicated server host with 6500
I'm sharing with 5 other small businesses a dedicated server with 60GB
hard drive, 700GB monthly bandwidth on a 10Mbps link for $49/month.
Where is this available?
Not quite that package and I've never used them (thinking about it), but
layeredtech.com has this as their cheapest:
. Intel Ce
> I'm sharing with 5 other small businesses a dedicated server with 60GB
> hard drive, 700GB monthly bandwidth on a 10Mbps link for $49/month.
Where is this available?
The web host that I do programming for pays around $120 a month for a
Debian machine with an AMD Athlon 2200 Processor, 1GB Memo
This seems penny wise and pound foolish. The cost of the remote hosting is
going to be swamped by whatever you are paying somneone to keep an eye on it.
The savings for sharing the host, aren't going to make up for any hassels
involved in sharing the host.
That depends, if they went with a M
On Fri, Sep 09, 2005 at 16:21:42 -0700,
Ron Mayer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Various people wrote:
> >>>...PostgreSQL...crontab support...pl/pgsql
>
> I've found that with if you can get 5 companies/users to share a
> dedicated server you can be much better off than a hosting plan,
> and hav
On Sep 9, 2005, at 8:02 PM, Matthew Terenzio wrote:
On Sep 9, 2005, at 7:54 PM, Scott Marlowe wrote:
On Fri, 2005-09-09 at 18:35, Matthew Terenzio wrote:
On Sep 9, 2005, at 7:21 PM, Ron Mayer wrote:
I've found that with if you can get 5 companies/users to share a
dedicated server you can
On Sep 9, 2005, at 7:21 PM, Ron Mayer wrote:
I've found that with if you can get 5 companies/users to share a
dedicated server you can be much better off than a hosting plan,
and have full control over the services you run.
I'm sure the numbers work out, but it sounds like being in a Band.
Various people wrote:
...PostgreSQL...crontab support...pl/pgsql
I've found that with if you can get 5 companies/users to share a
dedicated server you can be much better off than a hosting plan,
and have full control over the services you run.
I'm sharing with 5 other small businesses a dedi
We offer Postgresql hosting with phpPgAdmin on Mac Dual G5 Xserve servers:
http://www.systame.com/html/macwebhosting/
--
Randall Perry
sysTame
Xserve Web Hosting/Co-location/Leasing
QuickTime Streaming
Mac Consulting/Sales
http://www.systame.com/
---(end of broad
On Thu, 8 Sep 2005, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
http://cwihosting.com/
Apache with Frontpage extensions (if you want them), PHP, PostgreSQL and
ssh access including crontab support. Having pl/pgsql added to template1
was done in no time. I only had to put a binary cvs executable there so
that I
http://cwihosting.com/
Apache with Frontpage extensions (if you want them), PHP, PostgreSQL and
ssh access including crontab support. Having pl/pgsql added to template1
was done in no time. I only had to put a binary cvs executable there so
that I can develop somewhere else and deploy the ch
On 8/4/2005 10:28 PM, Richard Sydney-Smith wrote:
I have asked my internet host to include postgresql as part of their
service but it seems that there are issues in getting it to work with
"cpanel" which is their support service for their clients. Is their a
reason why Postgresql is harder to h
Thanks ,
Would seem there is no problem eith cpanel + postgresql.
thanks for the link to a2hosting I will look them up.
John DeSoi wrote:
On Aug 4, 2005, at 10:28 PM, Richard Sydney-Smith wrote:
I have asked my internet host to include postgresql as part of their
service but it seems tha
On Aug 4, 2005, at 10:28 PM, Richard Sydney-Smith wrote:
I have asked my internet host to include postgresql as part of
their service but it seems that there are issues in getting it to
work with "cpanel" which is their support service for their
clients. Is their a reason why Postgresql is
On Fri, 5 Aug 2005, Richard Sydney-Smith wrote:
> I have asked my internet host to include postgresql as part of their
> service but it seems that there are issues in getting it to work with
> "cpanel" which is their support service for their clients. Is their a
> reason why Postgresql is harder
I don't really think it's that bad (if it proves to work):
1. A simple modification to system_views.sql
2. Modified schema search path: public, pg_catalog, $user
3. New public views: pg_database, pg_group
If the final two pieces work, we won't even need to modify phpPgAdmin.
Anyway, thanks for
Thomas F. O'Connell wrote:
Joshua,
Is there any difference between a catalog and a cluster? As in, are you
saying a separate postmaster per user, as Tom Lane suggested in the
post I referenced earlier in this thread?
No difference. Yes as Tom Lane suggested. It also helps with migration.
I
Joshua,
Is there any difference between a catalog and a cluster? As in, are
you saying a separate postmaster per user, as Tom Lane suggested in
the post I referenced earlier in this thread?
Off-hand, do you (or anyone else) see any showstoppers with the
implementation I laid out involving
Although it is resource intensive, Command Prompt creates a new catalog
owned by the user for each account. So on a given machine we will have
25 postgresql catalogs running on separate ports.
This has worked very well for us for the last couple of years.
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
--
Your P
In my haste, I neglected to update the name of this view in my post to pg_database from its original definition as pg_db, which was the original name of the hacked view.The point is that we want pg_catalog.pg_database to be superseded by public.pg_database from the point of view of both the user an
Okay, after setting up a hosting environment based on my original post, we immediately discovered a few caveats. One is that, as written, pg_user creates issues with pg_dump because a given user needs access to various system catalogs and postgres must exist in pg_user, so we updated the view. Seco
23 matches
Mail list logo
