Which Front End for Postgresql

Hi

As you might have figured out Postgresql is merely a server. (And some
client code too).
You have to find programs that do the input-forms, reports....

I tend to use Apache and PHP for these tasks.
It works like ASP for Windows (but better in my opinion).

PostgreSQL is not like eg Access for Windows.
Access for windows has two parts.
1. The database engine
2. Application support/development/applications/dataview/query-windows...

PostgreSQL is only 1. the Database engine.
Though there is a command-line-based client "psql".
And some administrative tools (also commandline) like initdb.

As for Operating-system I'd recommend a good Linux-distribution.
There are quite a few (and I really dont like anyone of them too much ;-)
Personally use Slackware. Debian is said to be good too.

Redhat is sort of an industry-standard beqause it is relatively easy to
configure but I would personally not recommend it for a Server-OS.

As for the choice of filesystem.
ext2 (which most linux use) has somewhat poorer performance on
character-writing than eg UFS (which FreeBSD use) but I think the
programmers on PostgreSQL have solved this with good caching and
block-writing-routines ;-)

Best of luck
Per-Olof Pettersson

Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

On 2001-05-16, 04:08:06, bscinc2000@yahoo.comNOSPAM (Al Frick) wrote
regarding Which Front End for Postgresql:

On 16 May 2001 02:59:02 +0000, Per-Olof Pettersson wrote:

Redhat is sort of an industry-standard beqause it is relatively easy to
configure but I would personally not recommend it for a Server-OS.

As for the choice of filesystem.
ext2 (which most linux use) has somewhat poorer performance on
character-writing than eg UFS (which FreeBSD use) but I think the
programmers on PostgreSQL have solved this with good caching and
block-writing-routines ;-)

Funny thing is that SGI have rpms for RedHat XFS install... XFS is a
server file system is it not?

RedHat can be made into a server OS it just takes some work. Read the
excellent http://www.linuxdoc.org/links/p_books.html#securing_linux

I use it because it was the first CD in a 6 cd set I bought. I have
tried others (I ran Suze for about 10 months on a server and I found
that to be worse...). Debian and Slackware have a reputation of being
too hard to install.

I would personnaly choose FreeBSD for the PostgreSQL server and RedHat
as the client workstation.

Cheers

Tony Grant

--
RedHat Linux on Sony Vaio C1XD/S
http://www.animaproductions.com/linux2.html
Macromedia UltraDev with PostgreSQL
http://www.animaproductions.com/ultra.html

There is a Tcl/Tk frontend to PostgreSQL that is almost like Access.
http://www.flex.ro/pgqccess

For linux the best file system I've found is Reiserfs it is a journaling
file system and it is as stable as linux, you can even push the big red
button while the disk works and you'll find your disk intact when you
reboot.
It is fast adn reliable and best of all you can't break your file system.
http://www.reiserfs.com/

In article <20010516.2590235@mis.configured.host>, Per-Olof Pettersson wrote:

Hi

PostgreSQL is not like eg Access for Windows.
Access for windows has two parts.
1. The database engine
2. Application support/development/applications/dataview/query-windows...

PostgreSQL is only 1. the Database engine.
Though there is a command-line-based client "psql".
And some administrative tools (also commandline) like initdb.

As for the choice of filesystem.
ext2 (which most linux use) has somewhat poorer performance on
character-writing than eg UFS (which FreeBSD use) but I think the
programmers on PostgreSQL have solved this with good caching and
block-writing-routines ;-)

Best of luck
Per-Olof Pettersson

--
Manuel Cano Mu�oz
------------------------------
SANYRES, S.A.
Director Dpto. Sistemas
manuel@sanyres.com
manuel@sanyres.es

On Wed, 16 May 2001 08:01:42 +0000 (UTC), tony@animaproductions.com
(Tony Grant) wrote:
...

I would personnaly choose FreeBSD for the PostgreSQL server and RedHat
as the client workstation.

Cheers

Tony Grant

Thanks for all of the posts.

I may try FreeBSD as the server. But I am a little confused. My
clients want Windows on the work stations. Can this be done?

Can the FreeBSD server with Postgresql then act as a database server
for internal data and as a web host for publishing data to the Net? I
realize there are security issues here. Would it be better to have an
internal data server and have an external web host? Can Postgresql
handle the same data on two different servers if I do this? Does it
have replication or some other feature that makes off site web hosting
possible?

Thanks
Al

Al Frick wrote:

I may try FreeBSD as the server. But I am a little confused. My
clients want Windows on the work stations. Can this be done?

The PostgreSQL ODBC driver for win32 works fine. With packages like
MS-Access, Delphi, VB etc. you can write a client application and
connect thru ODBC. There is also a JDBC driver available which makes it
possible to connect to PostgreSQL from a Java written client.

Can the FreeBSD server with Postgresql then act as a database server
for internal data and as a web host for publishing data to the Net? I
realize there are security issues here. Would it be better to have an
internal data server and have an external web host?

You can put the webserver on another machine then your databaseserver.
You can connect to the PostgreSQL server via TCP/IP (don't forget to
switch the -i parameter on for the postmaster).

Can Postgresql
handle the same data on two different servers if I do this? Does it
have replication or some other feature that makes off site web hosting
possible?

AFAIK replication and joining tables over multiple databases are not
supported in PostgreSQL. But if you keep your database on one machine
your clientprograms should be able to connect from diferent machines to
the databaseserver. You can configure PostgreSQL only to accept
connections from specified domains and/or IP addresses.

HTH,

Nils

http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2760874,00.html?chkpt=zdnn0516
01

It would be great if we could see where postgres fits in this benchmark

--dc--

Tony Grant wrote:

Debian and Slackware have a reputation of being
too hard to install.

I find that Debian is not very hard to install. Actually, it seems to
me that the application packages are generally done better, as far as
default setup, etc., such that they run correctly "out of the box". So
installation is actually easier if you consider application setup as a
part of it.

Besides, installation is a one-time thing. Debian is extremely easy to
*maintain*, much more so than RedHat, in my experience. And that is
more important in the long run, IMHO.

Now, if we're talking clients, rather than a server, there'd be a better
case for RH, though I'd probably not be persuaded. ;-)

I hope I have not gotten too far off topic here, or started a useless
flamewar...

In article <3B02682C.3F2407D@mbit.nl>, Nils Zonneveld wrote:

Al Frick wrote:

I may try FreeBSD as the server. But I am a little confused. My
clients want Windows on the work stations. Can this be done?

The PostgreSQL ODBC driver for win32 works fine. With packages like
MS-Access, Delphi, VB etc. you can write a client application and
connect thru ODBC. There is also a JDBC driver available which makes it
possible to connect to PostgreSQL from a Java written client.

Can the FreeBSD server with Postgresql then act as a database server
for internal data and as a web host for publishing data to the Net? I
realize there are security issues here. Would it be better to have an
internal data server and have an external web host?

You can put the webserver on another machine then your databaseserver.
You can connect to the PostgreSQL server via TCP/IP (don't forget to
switch the -i parameter on for the postmaster).

Can Postgresql
handle the same data on two different servers if I do this? Does it
have replication or some other feature that makes off site web hosting
possible?

AFAIK replication and joining tables over multiple databases are not
supported in PostgreSQL. But if you keep your database on one machine
your clientprograms should be able to connect from diferent machines to
the databaseserver. You can configure PostgreSQL only to accept
connections from specified domains and/or IP addresses.

HTH,

Nils

Yeah!
We use PostgreSQL on a Netfinity and our "clients" (our three work centers)
are at miles (well, kilometers here (300km)) from headquarters.
Clients use web pages (php) over a VPN via ADSL.
There are two servers that access the databases directly via dedicated
line, but a few states ahead from our office.
The web pages are served from a different machine than db.
They work simply perfect.

I have simply forgotten the problems I used to have with other "systems".

--
Manuel Cano Mu�oz
------------------------------
SANYRES, S.A.
Director Dpto. Sistemas
manuel@sanyres.com
manuel@sanyres.es

On Wed, 16 May 2001 15:24:00 +0000 (UTC), keithmur@mindspring.com
("Keith G. Murphy") wrote:

Now, if we're talking clients, rather than a server, there'd be a better
case for RH, though I'd probably not be persuaded. ;-)

My users want to keep their Windows workstations. They like Office,
god knows why. What can I use as the client software to develop
database apps if I go with Linux, Debian, and PostgreSQL?

Also can I create a file server with the above software to hold my
word processing and other Office files?

What do you recommend as a backup hardware and software for this
environment?

Thansks for the reply,

Al Frick

In article <033f01c0de0d$ce93fcc0$230470d1@INSPIRON>, "Dave Cramer"
<Dave@micro-automation.net> wrote:

http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2760874,00.html?chkpt=zdnn0516
01

It would be great if we could see where postgres fits in this benchmark

There are lies, damned lies, and benchmarks.

That said (or shamelessly cribbed from Disraeli),
I have found that for my current application (an
auditing system for the transportation industry),
PostgreSQL is 2-4 times faster than DB2 UDB 7.1
for most of our queries. To say that I was suprised
is an understatement (no offense to the PostgreSQL
crew).

The database has a couple dozen tables, the
largest is just over 1GB with 3.5 million rows.
The database as a whole is over 6GB.

This is running PostgreSQL 7.1 under RedHat 7.1
(it was true under RH 6.2, also).

Hardware is an IBM Netfinity 7000 (4xPPro200/1M)
with 1.5GB RAM and two RAID-5E arrays. My customer
is running on a Dell PowerEdge 2400 (2xPIII 866)
with 512MB RAM with a RAID-1 and a RAID-10 array.
This one is amazingly fast!

As always, your mileage may vary, contents may
have settled during shipment, and objects in
mirror are closer than they appear.

Gordon.
--
It doesn't get any easier, you just go faster.
-- Greg LeMond

In article <3b061853.20936084@news-server.tampabay.rr.com>, Al Frick wrote:

On Wed, 16 May 2001 15:24:00 +0000 (UTC), keithmur@mindspring.com
("Keith G. Murphy") wrote:

Now, if we're talking clients, rather than a server, there'd be a better
case for RH, though I'd probably not be persuaded. ;-)

My users want to keep their Windows workstations. They like Office,
god knows why. What can I use as the client software to develop
database apps if I go with Linux, Debian, and PostgreSQL?

Also can I create a file server with the above software to hold my
word processing and other Office files?

What do you recommend as a backup hardware and software for this
environment?

Thansks for the reply,

Al Frick

Hi.

You can keep you win workstations. Just develop web apps or use
VB or anything you like that can use odbc. I found web apps
easy to develop, easy to mantain and with great user interfaces.
Aparently, when a user works with a web app he has in mind
Internet and the work is more like a Inet surfing, so he enjoy
a little more (yes, a little).

As for your file server, yes. You can use Samba. It works as a
Windows NT Server for domain logins, shared directories and so.
It behaves transparently to win workstations. Here we have a
Samba server with 25 win workstations and, from my experience,
it works even better than Windows NT.
Most linux distributions comes with Samba.

http://www.samba.org/

For backup we have a 24Gb tape and Bru, a commercial (but not
expensive) software that works great. If the tape you buy is
linux compatible you can use standard tools like tar, cpio
dump and others. We have nasty problems with backup restoring
with our tape (the tape that comes with an IBM Netfinity 7000)
when using tar, but Bru works simply perfect.
We use six tapes by month, five for each working day and one
for system (home made scripts and the like).

http://www.bru.com/

--
Manuel Cano Mu�oz
------------------------------
SANYRES, S.A.
Director Dpto. Sistemas
manuel@sanyres.com
manuel@sanyres.es

In article <989996977.1109.0.camel@tonux>, "Tony Grant"
<tony@animaproductions.com> wrote:

Funny thing is that SGI have rpms for RedHat XFS install... XFS is a
server file system is it not?

I believe the XFS you are speaking of is the X Font Server. Not a file
system. Redhat does use ext2, though I have heard good and bad about
ext3.

RedHat can be made into a server OS it just takes some work. Read the
excellent http://www.linuxdoc.org/links/p_books.html#securing_linux

I can't say as I agree... I've setup several servers on RH, for different
purposes of course, but none of them too more than, I'd say 2 hours for
the partitionaing, OS install, and configure of base servers, everything.
As far as securing it, I simply use a decent firewall (modified v. of
rc.firewall) and portsentry. That's all.

I would personnaly choose FreeBSD for the PostgreSQL server and RedHat
as the client workstation.

I so far have not had much luck with FreeBSD, it has fought with me all
the way. Consequently, I don't have a BSD box running right now. The
only complaint I really have with it, since every OS has it's little
quirks, is that it does not seem to be quite up to date with hardware.

Scream and yell... yeah I know it's way off topic.

Damaen <damian@rochester.rr.com> wrote:

In article <989996977.1109.0.camel@tonux>, "Tony Grant"
<tony@animaproductions.com> wrote:

Funny thing is that SGI have rpms for RedHat XFS install... XFS is a
server file system is it not?

I believe the XFS you are speaking of is the X Font Server. Not a file
system.

I doubt that. It looks like Tony is referring the XFS filesystem,
http://linux-xfs.sgi.com/projects/xfs/ .

HTH,
Ray
--
The Linux movement has been independent of anything Microsoft is doing. It's
one of those cosmic movements in the industry, like the emergence of the
Internet, or microprocessors.
Irving Wladawsky-Berger, IBM VP in http://www.informationweek.com/793/ibm.htm

Al Frick wrote:

Which software should I use for a front end for Postgresql? I know I
need an admistrator package for the databases, don't I?

What about which software to write the enduser routines? The input
screens, etc?

come to think of it, what software should I use for reporting on the
internal network?

And what should I use for publishing data on the Net?

The first question is - what's the platform? If it's UNIX - there is
pg_access - an X based front end. Of course psql is a the text-based front
end, and it works pretty well.

You can use Access, or any other ODBC compliant database system as a front
end for postgresql too.

Basically, you can pretty much use anything that you are used to, or have
access to, to do front-end or back-end work with Postgres. I use mostly
perl.

Michelle

Hi,

Does anybody know of any issues with Mac OS 9.x and either AppleWorks or
Excel and ODBC access to a Postgres backend?

I have a client who needs to print labels and who has AppleWorks.

Cheers

Tony Grant

--
RedHat Linux on Sony Vaio C1XD/S
http://www.animaproductions.com/linux2.html
Macromedia UltraDev with PostgreSQL
http://www.animaproductions.com/ultra.html

I have a problem with PostgresSQL 7.1 and Micro$oft Windoze ODBC and MS
Access 2000 which I am hoping someone here might be able to help me with.

When I try to link MS Access to a PostgresSQL 7.1 table, Access is unable to
see any of the tables in the database so I cannot select a table to link.

I have no problem with PostgresSQL 7.03 nor with MySQL. When I attempt to
connect to the database using ZDE (a windows database client) I have no
problem; probably because ZDE does not use the windows DSN. At lease, that
is what I am assuming.

I have attempted this with two separate 7.1 databases on two separate
machines, one set up by me on a debian linux box the other set up by our
network administrator so I don't _think_ it's a setup issue with PostgresSQL
7.1

Is there a URL for the latest driver for PostgresSQL 7.1 (I've downloaded a
new driver but I'm not certain it's the most recent)?

Is there some known issue with PostgresSQL 7.1 and windows ODBC (windows NT
that is)?

Tony Grant wrote:

Hi,

Does anybody know of any issues with Mac OS 9.x and either AppleWorks or
Excel and ODBC access to a Postgres backend?

I have a client who needs to print labels and who has AppleWorks.

Actually, I was going to investigate this for FileMaker - are their
postgresql ODBC drivers for the mac? I couldn't find any.

Michelle

On 21 May 2001 13:02:21 +0000, Michelle Murrain wrote:

Actually, I was going to investigate this for FileMaker - are their
postgresql ODBC drivers for the mac? I couldn't find any.

M$ ones should work. There is one for 4D ($$$)

Cheers

Tony Grant

--
RedHat Linux on Sony Vaio C1XD/S
http://www.animaproductions.com/linux2.html
Macromedia UltraDev with PostgreSQL
http://www.animaproductions.com/ultra.html

Monday...

I can't get my brain around this one.

Get the top three replies from a quizz.

I want to select from a table all records which have a value of
1.000000, 2.000000 and 3.000000. Then I want to class the records by the
column which has the most 1 followed by the most 2...

Yes I was thrown out of math class in high school... All these dark
secrets which are coming out now...

I don't want code I want the logic so that I can try to write the code
for myself. TIA

Cheers

Tony Grant

--
RedHat Linux on Sony Vaio C1XD/S
http://www.animaproductions.com/linux2.html
Macromedia UltraDev with PostgreSQL
http://www.animaproductions.com/ultra.html