On 13/07/2003 20:51 Balazs Wellisch wrote:
[snip]
> > So, does anyone here have any experience using RH AS and DB 2.1?
>
> Are RH still selling DB 2.1? I can't find it listed on their web site.
> --
Yes, it's available for free download. The documentation is here:
http://www.redhat.com/docs/manual
On Sun, Jul 13, 2003 at 12:51:02PM -0700, Balazs Wellisch wrote:
>
> Unfortunatelly, compiling from source is not really an option for us. We use
> RPMs only to ease the installation and upgrade process. We have over a
> hundred servers to maintaine and having to compile and recompile software
> e
On Sun, Jul 13, 2003 at 12:42:29PM -0700, Balazs Wellisch wrote:
> > On Sun, 2003-07-13 at 01:35, Balazs Wellisch wrote:
> > Note that I've read a couple of times from Tom Lane (one of the
> > core team) that FKs are a serous performance drag, so I'd drop
> > them after the s/w has been in product
On Monday 14 July 2003 01:21, Balazs Wellisch wrote:
> Unfortunatelly, compiling from source is not really an option for us. We
> use RPMs only to ease the installation and upgrade process. We have over a
> hundred servers to maintaine and having to compile and recompile software
> everytime a new
On Sun, Jul 13, 2003 at 12:51:02PM -0700, Balazs Wellisch wrote:
> > Alternatively, you simply compile 7.3.3 from source. I've upgraded most my
> > machines that way.
> >
>
> Unfortunatelly, compiling from source is not really an option for us. We use
> RPMs only to ease the installation and upgra
Balazs Wellisch wrote:
I would *not* use the default version of Postgres shipped with any
particular distribution. Use 7.3.3 because that is the latest released
version. Or, as Shridhar mentioned in his post, the are a number of
pretty significant performance improvements in 7.4 (which is in featur
> There are many Linux and other OS distributions that will work just
> fine. You may need to tweak a few kernel configuration parameters, but
> that's not too difficult; see:
>
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/view.php?version=7.3&idoc=0&file=kernel-resources.html
>
Yes, I looked at the online doc
> The most important thing seems to be to increase shared_buffers. On my
> RH7.3 machine here, Linux is configured with shmmax = 32MB which allows me
> a value of just under 4000 for shared_buffers (3900 works, 3950 doesn't).
> If your selects return large amounts of data, you'll probably also nee
> On Sun, 2003-07-13 at 01:35, Balazs Wellisch wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> >
> >
> > I’m in the process of initiating a movement in our company to move
> > towards open source software use. As part of this movement I will be
> > recommending PostgreSQL as an alternative to the currently used MSSQL.
>
> On Sunday 13 July 2003 12:05, Balazs Wellisch wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > However, to be able to justify the move I will have to demonstrate that
> > PostgreSQL is up to par with MSSQL and MySQL when it comes to
> > performance. After having read through the docs and the lists it seems
> > obvious th
Balazs Wellisch wrote:
I don't have months to learn the ins and outs of PostgreSQL
performance tuning so I looked around to see if there are any
preconfigured solutions out there.
I don't know of a preconfigured solution. Generally speaking, the best
configuration will be highly dependent on your
On Sunday 13 July 2003 12:05, Balazs Wellisch wrote:
> Hi all,
> However, to be able to justify the move I will have to demonstrate that
> PostgreSQL is up to par with MSSQL and MySQL when it comes to
> performance. After having read through the docs and the lists it seems
> obvious that PostgreSQL
12 matches
Mail list logo
