Change to PostgreSQL

Félix Beltrán wrote:

Hi all,

I'm new to PostgreSQL. I've been working for about two years with mySQL
but i'm evaluating other options (like PostgreSQL) because of lack of
features and a more restrictive licensing model. Right now what i am
looking in PostgreSQL is:

1) Free distribution even for non free applications (including .Net
driver).

http://www.postgresql.org/about/
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs.FAQ.html
http://www.postgresql.org/download/
http://gborg.postgresql.org/project/npgsql/projdisplay.php

2) Is there a good graphical database designer for PostgreSQL wich also
suppors online database synchronization?

Not sure what you mean here. There are a number of graphical clients.
Were you looking for a schema-designer?

3) Easy of management and robust so it needs almost zero administration
(applications suited for non technical users)

Depends how you set it up. End-users shouldn't need to do anything.

4) Light enough so it can be used on applications installed in a single
PC.

Depends on the database and the PC. I regularly demonstrate/train on
systems built using PG/PHP using an old iBook laptop. Handles about a
dozen users OK, not tried more.

Be aware that most PC disk systems lie about flushing data to disk, so
PG can't offer the same guarantee on data integrity that it can with
SCSI disk systems.
--
Richard Huxton
Archonet Ltd

Hi,

I would sometimes need a lot of parameters, even 100 or so. These would be
the data access functions for tables. I know the default count limit is 32,
and FUNC_MAX_ARGS compile option should be set to, say, 256.
But I have another option, a bit harder, I could pass the parameters in a
record type. Passing parameters such way is a problematic because the
provider I would use does not support it yet.
My question is that is the second method faster?

Simple example:

create table person(id serial primary key, name text not null, address
text);

--First option:

create function person_ins(_name text, _address text) -- <<------
returns person
language plpgsql
as
$$
declare
inserted_row person;
begin
--insert row
insert into person (name, address) values (_name, _address); -- <<-----
--retrieve inserted row
select into inserted_row * from person where
id=currval('person_id_seq'::text);
--return with it
return inserted_row;
end;
$$;

--Second option:

create function person_ins(_person person) -- <<----
returns person
language plpgsql
as
$$
declare
inserted_row person;
begin
--insert row
insert into person (name, address) values (_person.name,
person.address); -- <<------
--retrieve inserted row
select into inserted_row * from person where
id=currval('person_id_seq'::text);
--return with it
return inserted_row;
end;
$$;

I hope there are no syntax errors.
Of course in a real application I would have a lot more parameters.

Best Regards,
Otto

I saw their announment today and they said they have Oracle compatiblility.

What exactly does this mean? They don't go into any details. Did they
implement a Oracle compatible proc language or something?

Tony

Tony Caduto wrote:

I saw their announment today and they said they have Oracle compatiblility.

What exactly does this mean? They don't go into any details. Did they
implement a Oracle compatible proc language or something?

I don't know the full details but my understanding is they implemented
things like IN/OUT parameters and a superset of pl/SQL.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

Tony

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend

--
Your PostgreSQL solutions company - Command Prompt, Inc. 1.800.492.2240
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Programming, 24x7 support
Managed Services, Shared and Dedicated Hosting
Co-Authors: plPHP, plPerlNG - http://www.commandprompt.com/

On Wed, Aug 10, 2005 at 03:42:59PM -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:

Tony Caduto wrote:

I saw their announment today and they said they have Oracle
compatiblility.

What exactly does this mean? They don't go into any details. Did
they implement a Oracle compatible proc language or something?

I don't know the full details but my understanding is they
implemented things like IN/OUT parameters and a superset of pl/SQL.

I spoke with them today at LWE/SF. They have a subset of PL/SQL (no
packages yet, but they're working on it for A Really Big Client) and
are able to do in-line anonymous PL/SQL blocks. I'm hoping we can
talk them into helping us do in-line anonymous PL/Foo based on what
they've done for this. :)

Cheers,
D
--
David Fetter david@fetter.org http://fetter.org/
phone: +1 510 893 6100 mobile: +1 415 235 3778

Remember to vote!

according to the article they "make postgresql" :-)

http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1846635,00.asp

Tony Caduto wrote:

according to the article they "make postgresql" :-)
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1846635,00.asp

Worse, they are partnering with SCO. Sorry Denis/Andy I just can't agree
with that one.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

I agree, SCO is vile, but Borland what the heck are they thinking.....

Tony

Joshua D. Drake wrote:

On Wed, 10 Aug 2005 21:54:45 -0500, Tony Caduto
<tony_caduto@amsoftwaredesign.com> wrote:

I agree, SCO is vile, but Borland what the heck are they thinking.....

It's borland. Every few years they fly off in a bizarre direction. If
kylix is anything to go by, they won't be doing much anyway.

Perhaps someone from advocacy could contact eweek and put them straight.

klint.

+---------------------------------------+-----------------+
: Klint Gore                            : "Non rhyming    :
: EMail   : kg@kgb.une.edu.au           :  slang - the    :
: Snail   : A.B.R.I.                    :  possibilities  :
: Mail      University of New England   :  are useless"   :
:           Armidale NSW 2351 Australia :     L.J.J.      :
: Fax     : +61 2 6772 5376             :                 :
+---------------------------------------+-----------------+

Klint Gore wrote:

On Wed, 10 Aug 2005 21:54:45 -0500, Tony Caduto
<tony_caduto@amsoftwaredesign.com> wrote:

I agree, SCO is vile, but Borland what the heck are they thinking.....

It's borland. Every few years they fly off in a bizarre direction. If
kylix is anything to go by, they won't be doing much anyway.

Perhaps someone from advocacy could contact eweek and put them straight.

I have already contacted e-week.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

Once the flood gates of new features are opened up for 8.2, we'd be happy to submit a patch for anonymous blocks. Also, if there are other features we've added that makes since to roll back, let us know and we could submit that as well.
Thanks,
Jim
-----------------
Jim Mlodgenski
Sr. Architect
http://www.enterprisedb.com

From: David Fetter <david@fetter.org>
Date: Aug 10, 2005 5:54 PM
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] What's up with EnterpriseDB?
To: "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>
Cc: Tony Caduto <tony_caduto@amsoftwaredesign.com>, pgsql-general@postgresql.org

On Wed, Aug 10, 2005 at 03:42:59PM -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:

Tony Caduto wrote:

I saw their announment today and they said they have Oracle
compatiblility.

What exactly does this mean? They don't go into any details. Did
they implement a Oracle compatible proc language or something?

I don't know the full details but my understanding is they
implemented things like IN/OUT parameters and a superset of pl/SQL.

I spoke with them today at LWE/SF. They have a subset of PL/SQL (no
packages yet, but they're working on it for A Really Big Client) and
are able to do in-line anonymous PL/SQL blocks. I'm hoping we can
talk them into helping us do in-line anonymous PL/Foo based on what
they've done for this. :)

Cheers,
D
--
David Fetter david@fetter.org http://fetter.org/
phone: +1 510 893 6100 mobile: +1 415 235 3778

Remember to vote!

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend

F�lix Beltr�n wrote:

1) Free distribution even for non free applications (including .Net
driver).

Totally free license.

2) Is there a good graphical database designer for PostgreSQL wich also
suppors online database synchronization?

PgadminIII is supposed to be good. I haven't used it much myself,
however. http://pgadmin.org/

3) Easy of management and robust so it needs almost zero administration
(applications suited for non technical users)

Yes. Like any database, if you have high performance demands, you need
to watch it more closely. However, in most cases it's fire-and-forget.
The one exception I can think of is that you want to either add a cron
script to VACUUM the database regularly, or install the autovacuum
module. Most postgresql packages (like the debian postgresql package) do
this for you.

4) Light enough so it can be used on applications installed in a single
PC.

The footprint is only maybe 30 MB. It can run on pretty much any PC.

Regards,
Jeff Davis

Hi Richard,

Thanks for your answer. About your comments, in the original order:

1) Thanks for the links. I found in PostgreSQLs FAQ that any one can
use the database for any purpose, including comercial development. But
i couln't find if this applies to the .net driver too.

2) Yes I mean a schema designer. I downloaded a demo from CASE Studio
(http://www.casestudio.com/enu/default.aspx) It looks like a very good
product (also price is ok), but it does not support direct connection
to the database for schema update/synchronization.

3), 4) I guess that's enough. The databases i'm using are in the order
of 100k records and no more than 3 or 4 concurrent users.

Regards,

Felix Beltran

Richard Huxton <dev@archonet.com>
Sent by: pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org

10/08/2005 02:23 a.m.
Tofbeltran@cln.megared.net.mx
ccpgsql-general@postgresql.org
SubjectRe: [GENERAL] Change to PostgreSQL

F�lix Beltr�n wrote:

Hi all,

I'm new to PostgreSQL. I've been working for about two years with

mySQL

but i'm evaluating other options (like PostgreSQL) because of lack

of

features and a more restrictive licensing model. Right now what i

am

looking in PostgreSQL is:

1) Free distribution even for non free applications (including .Net
driver).

http://www.postgresql.org/about/
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs.FAQ.html
http://www.postgresql.org/download/
http://gborg.postgresql.org/project/npgsql/projdisplay.php

2) Is there a good graphical database designer for PostgreSQL wich

also

suppors online database synchronization?

Not sure what you mean here. There are a number of graphical clients.
Were you looking for a schema-designer?

3) Easy of management and robust so it needs almost zero

administration

(applications suited for non technical users)

Depends how you set it up. End-users shouldn't need to do anything.

4) Light enough so it can be used on applications installed in a

single

PC.

Depends on the database and the PC. I regularly demonstrate/train on
systems built using PG/PHP using an old iBook laptop. Handles about a
dozen users OK, not tried more.

Be aware that most PC disk systems lie about flushing data to disk,

so

I saw their announment today and they said they have Oracle compatiblility.

What exactly does this mean? They don't go into any details. Did
they implement a Oracle compatible proc language or something?

I believe you are correct.

It's probably safer to say "they have implemented a more nearly Oracle
compatible procedural language."

You can get /some/ feel for it by looking at the recent release
notes... <http://www.enterprisedb.com/releasenotes.do&gt;

- They have a "DUAL" table (a table guaranteed to have 1 row)
- You don't need the full function argument "signature" in order
to drop a function; just name the function
- They seem to have added in a SYS user

You can download version 8.0.3.12, which presumably includes some
amount of documentation...
--
(reverse (concatenate 'string "moc.liamg" "@" "enworbbc"))
http://cbbrowne.com/info/
If we were meant to fly, we wouldn't keep losing our luggage.