> Sorry to be such a pest. Since an administrator will get this error:
>
> creating template1 database in u:/msys/1.0/local/pgsql/data/base/1 ...
> execution of PostgreSQL by a user with administrative
> permissions is not permitted.
> The server must be started under an unprivileged user ID to
Part of my final year thesis involves creating a
database using PostgreSQL. As a way of documentation,
is it correct to say that PosgreSQL belongs to the
fifth generation of database management systems? Where
does MySQL fall into? The fourth generation?
Thanks,
Newton Eyinagho
Am Donnerstag, 2. September 2004 13:00 schrieb Eyinagho Newton:
> Part of my final year thesis involves creating a
> database using PostgreSQL. As a way of documentation,
> is it correct to say that PosgreSQL belongs to the
> fifth generation of database management systems? Where
> does MySQL fall
By chance I noticed that when you tagged 8.0beta2, you rebuilt configure
with autoconf 2.59. This is not good when the rest of us are using
2.53. We have to stick to a common standard.
We could talk about asking all committers to update to 2.59, but
mid-beta is probably not the right time for a
I have both installed, but neither is 'autoconf', so I took the newer one
;( Will keep this in mind on next beta ... sorry about that ...
On Thu, 2 Sep 2004, Tom Lane wrote:
By chance I noticed that when you tagged 8.0beta2, you rebuilt configure
with autoconf 2.59. This is not good when the re
On Thursday 02 September 2004 00:20, Joe Conway wrote:
> I just posted a source rpm for beta2, along with binary rpms for
> fc1-i386, fc2-i386, and fc2-x86_64.
> http://www.joeconway.com/postgresql-8.0.0beta/
> BTW, I've been naming these similar to the "official" rpms (e.g.
> Postgresql-8.0.0*PG
On 9/1/2004 9:02 PM, Gaetano Mendola wrote:
Jan Wieck wrote:
Which is another point I was about to ask. How do these people, running
those huge and horribly important databases, ever test a single
application change? Or any schema changes for that matter. Do they
really type "psql -c 'alter tab
On Thu, 2 Sep 2004, Lamar Owen wrote:
> Sorry, I've been kindof swamped around here. Please name them using, say, a
> 'JC' instead of 'PGDG' if you don't mind. I appreciate you providing these;
> however, I do intend to be releasing RPM's soon, but probably not beta2 ones.
> I have some feat
Jan Wieck wrote:
> On 9/1/2004 9:02 PM, Gaetano Mendola wrote:
>
>> Jan Wieck wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Which is another point I was about to ask. How do these people,
>>> running those huge and horribly important databases, ever test a
>>> single application change? Or any schema changes for that matter. D
On Thursday 02 September 2004 16:27, Jon Jensen wrote:
> I've been meaning to ask for a long time: Why does /var/log/pgsql get
> installed with the execute bit set? I don't have any other log files with
> the execute bit on, and can't imagine why that would be necessary or
> useful. Am I missing so
Open Source Projects:
http://www.garret.ru/~knizhnik/fastdb.html
http://sourceforge.net/projects/monetdb
Papers:
http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/cha95objectoriented.html
http://www.cs.ou.edu/~database/main_memory.htm
HTH
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTEC
Lamar Owen wrote:
On Thursday 02 September 2004 00:20, Joe Conway wrote:
BTW, I've been naming these similar to the "official" rpms (e.g.
Postgresql-8.0.0*PGDG.*.rpm) mainly just to be consistent. No one has
complained about it, so I take it that's OK?
Sorry, I've been kindof swamped around here.
12 matches
Mail list logo
