Re: Problems with Vista and Windows 7

From: Andrew Maclean <andrew(dot)amaclean(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org>
Cc: el dorado <do_ra_do(at)mail(dot)ru>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Problems with Vista and Windows 7
Date: 2010-07-08 20:42:58
Message-ID: AANLkTik3T_b5M6iVawTojZ8GkwPLJ5Gqf_HwwybR7vzc@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

I should add that I have no problems running Postgres in Windows 7.
The Windows installer works Ok for me.
In this thread I am not clear about whether it is postgres data (data
written and read by PostgreSQL) or user data that is being discussed.

Regards
Andrew

On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 5:53 PM, Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> wrote:
> 2010/7/8 el dorado <do_ra_do(at)mail(dot)ru>:
>> Thank you for your answers.
>> Well, the beginning of the story in details is here (http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general/2010-06/msg01135.php). Shortly, I tried to use functions from my own dll, but got an error "Could not open relation base\16123\16222: No such file or directory". Later I found out, using 'Process Monitor', that for some reason process 'postgres.exe' looked for this relation not in 'C:\PostgreSQL\8.4\data\base\16123\16222' but in 'C:\Users\postgres\AppData\Roaming\MyApplicationName\base\16123\16222' - certainly, there is no such file.
>>
>>
>>> Did you check, that registry key "Data Directory" is set properly in
>>> "HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\PostgreSQL\Installations\postgresql-8.4"
>>> folder?
>> Usually I don't use standard Windows Installer but take binaries. So there is no such branch in registry. When I tried to make test and install it from Installer I got the same result. :( "Data Directory" was set to PG-specific application dir.
>
> So this is an issue with an extension of your own? Can you post the code?
>
> You'll have to excuse us being skeptical about PostgreSQL being
> fundamentally broken in the way you describe. The Windows installer
> alone is downloaded tens of thousands of times per week, so I'm pretty
> sure someone would have reported such an issue before now. And that's
> ignoring the vast amount of testing that goes into every release,
> including on 32 and 64 bit versions of XP through 7 and 2003 through
> 2008R2.
>
> --
> Dave Page
> EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
> The Enterprise Postgres Company
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
>

--
___________________________________________
Andrew J. P. Maclean
Centre for Autonomous Systems
The Rose Street Building J04
The University of Sydney 2006 NSW
AUSTRALIA
Ph: +61 2 9351 3283
Fax: +61 2 9351 7474
URL: http://www.acfr.usyd.edu.au/
___________________________________________

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2010-07-08 21:13:47 Re: [GENERAL] 'default nextval()' loses schema-qualification in dump ?
Previous Message Adrian von Bidder 2010-07-08 19:23:06 Re: optimizer choosing the wrong index