Some of us run multiple database servers on the same machine for various
reasons. Testing a new version of a database, testing software (you
wouldn’t want to be doing testing on the production database), etc.
While many of you may say ‘why not put it on another machine’. This is
not always possible.
Sounds like a perfectly reasonable request to me
There’s at least one other postgres-related option I need to roll in.
This should happen for 2.0.6 or 2.0.7.
-jOn Wed, Aug 15, 2001 at 02:39:47PM -0400, Vivek Khera wrote:
JB> It’s on another port because we’re running an older version of PostgreSQL
JB> on the default port.
From a cursory scan of the initdb script, my guess is that if you
specify DB_HOST=localhost;port=NNNN in the Makefile, it should trick
it into using the correct DBI incantation to connect to port NNNN
instead of the default. You will of course have to try it to find
out, and double check the results after config.pm is generated.
That’s exactly what I would say.
If a test situation is considered viral enough to affect a working software
config, the assumption should be made, in order to protect the production
config, that the test may in fact affect the hardware as well, therefore, in
our shop, all tests get their own box.-----Original Message-----
From: rt-users-admin@lists.fsck.com
[mailto:rt-users-admin@lists.fsck.com]On Behalf Of Darrin Walton
Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 3:00 PM
To: Alan Charlton
Cc: jblaine@mitre.org; rt-users@lists.fsck.com
Subject: Re: [rt-users] Need “DB_PORT” in Makefile and support
throughout build
|+ This might seem a silly question, but why?
Some of us run multiple database servers on the same machine for various
reasons. Testing a new version of a database, testing software (you
wouldn’t want to be doing testing on the production database), etc.
While many of you may say ‘why not put it on another machine’. This is
not always possible.
|+ That’s exactly what I would say.
|+ If a test situation is considered viral enough to affect a working software
|+ config, the assumption should be made, in order to protect the production
|+ config, that the test may in fact affect the hardware as well, therefore, in
|+ our shop, all tests get their own box.
Let me present this situation to you.
You have to bring up a circuit (say OC48). Bringing up the circuit to
test could, in some way crash the router. (router vendor not important,
it could be either cisco or juniper).
Now, bringing the circuit up on a ‘test’ router, if you have one available
for both sides of the connections (which let me tell you, gets quite
expensive, usually test equipment is kept in a lab somewhere). You test
the circuit, it is clean. Now, you still have to put it on the production
router. Putting the circuit on the production router could crash the
router. What do you do?
Your solution is not feesable for every situation.
PS – Please don’t flame me… ;)From: “Darrin Walton” darrinw@nixc.net
To: “Technical Support” service@lobosoft.com
Cc: rt-users@lists.fsck.com
Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 5:11 PM
Subject: Re: [rt-users] Need “DB_PORT” in Makefile and support throughout
build
Let me present this situation to you.
You have to bring up a circuit (say OC48). Bringing up the circuit to
test could, in some way crash the router. (router vendor not important,
it could be either cisco or juniper).
Now, bringing the circuit up on a ‘test’ router, if you have one available
for both sides of the connections (which let me tell you, gets quite
expensive, usually test equipment is kept in a lab somewhere). You test
the circuit, it is clean. Now, you still have to put it on the production
router. Putting the circuit on the production router could crash the
router. What do you do?
Your solution is not feesable for every situation.
I’m going to have to agree with trevor here. Besides, I implemented
it tonight. It’ll be in the next prerelease of 2.0.6. I look forward to
hearing about whether it works right from folks who need it ;)On Wed, Aug 15, 2001 at 06:00:48PM -0700, Trevor Sky Garside wrote:
I’d like to point out that this discussion is getting needlessly off topic
for the rt-users list.
----- Original Message -----
From: “Darrin Walton” darrinw@nixc.net
To: “Technical Support” service@lobosoft.com
Cc: rt-users@lists.fsck.com
Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 5:11 PM
Subject: Re: [rt-users] Need “DB_PORT” in Makefile and support throughout
build
Let me present this situation to you.
You have to bring up a circuit (say OC48). Bringing up the circuit to
test could, in some way crash the router. (router vendor not important,
it could be either cisco or juniper).
Now, bringing the circuit up on a ‘test’ router, if you have one available
for both sides of the connections (which let me tell you, gets quite
expensive, usually test equipment is kept in a lab somewhere). You test
the circuit, it is clean. Now, you still have to put it on the production
router. Putting the circuit on the production router could crash the
router. What do you do?
Your solution is not feesable for every situation.