"Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> if you think about it, the "postmaster" is actually aptly named,
> since it is the process that sorts out the incoming connections and
> assigns them to backend processes ... just like the postmaster does
> with your mail ...
Right, hence the witty
Thomas Swan wrote:
I just thought the anecdote of confusing it for an MTA was a little funny.
Funny yes, but unfortunatly all too common for newbies I think.
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
>On Fri, 16 Jan 2004, Thomas Swan wrote:
>
>
>
>>Perhaps postgresd, postgresqld, or pg_daemon might be a little more
>>intuitive?
>>
>>
>
>I think at this late stage in the game (almost 10 years), changing could
>be a bit difficult and confusing, no? :) I'd go with
Marc G. Fournier writes:
> I think at this late stage in the game (almost 10 years), changing could
> be a bit difficult and confusing, no? :) I'd go with something like
> pgsqld myself though, keeps it short ... or we could go even shorter with
> just pgd ...
>
> But, I'm not, in any stre
On Fri, 16 Jan 2004, Thomas Swan wrote:
> Perhaps postgresd, postgresqld, or pg_daemon might be a little more
> intuitive?
I think at this late stage in the game (almost 10 years), changing could
be a bit difficult and confusing, no? :) I'd go with something like
pgsqld myself though, keeps it
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
>On Fri, 16 Jan 2004, Michael Glaesemann wrote:
>
>
>
>>On Jan 16, 2004, at 9:39 PM, Jeff Davis wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I can't point to any OSS project that completely renames its parts. I
>>>think a shortened version of the name makes sense (in this case
>>>"postgres" works
On Fri, 16 Jan 2004, Michael Glaesemann wrote:
>
> On Jan 16, 2004, at 9:39 PM, Jeff Davis wrote:
> > I can't point to any OSS project that completely renames its parts. I
> > think a shortened version of the name makes sense (in this case
> > "postgres" works well, but so does "pgsql"), and other
On Fri, 16 Jan 2004, Jeff Davis wrote:
> I can't point to any OSS project that completely renames its parts. I
> think a shortened version of the name makes sense (in this case
> "postgres" works well, but so does "pgsql"), and other projects do
> similar things. "Psql" for the client and "postmas
On Jan 16, 2004, at 9:39 PM, Jeff Davis wrote:
I can't point to any OSS project that completely renames its parts. I
think a shortened version of the name makes sense (in this case
"postgres" works well, but so does "pgsql"), and other projects do
similar things. "Psql" for the client and "postmast
> I too was a little confused when starting out with PostgreSQL as to
> what the difference was between some of these things, but they need
> different names so people can distinguish between them.
>
You make a good point, and I think that's easier for developers to work
with.
However, why d
Hi Lee
On Jan 16, 2004, at 8:09 PM, Lee Kindness wrote:
With the various paths, service names, config files and environment
variables PostgreSQL appears to have a multiple-personality
disorder... Is it:
postgresql (/etc/init.d/postgresql, postgresql.conf),
or postmaster (main postmaster proce
Just overheard one of my colleagues on the phone to one of our users
taking them through the process of moving their PGDATA to a partition
with space...
With the various paths, service names, config files and environment
variables PostgreSQL appears to have a multiple-personality
disorder... Is it
12 matches
Mail list logo
