Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: adminpacks / pgagent / specific version of pg?

From: "Dave Page" <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk>
To: Raphaël Enrici <blacknoz(at)club-internet(dot)fr>
Cc: "PgAdmin Hackers" <pgadmin-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: adminpacks / pgagent / specific version of pg?
Date: 2006-05-09 07:27:26
Message-ID: E7F85A1B5FF8D44C8A1AF6885BC9A0E401387FA6@ratbert.vale-housing.co.uk (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgadmin-hackers
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Raphaël Enrici [mailto:blacknoz(at)club-internet(dot)fr] 
> Sent: 08 May 2006 20:59
> To: Dave Page
> Cc: PgAdmin Hackers
> Subject: adminpacks / pgagent / specific version of pg?
> 
> Dave,
> 
> I've read that you are trying to make so that admin-packs 
> will be directly distributed with PostgreSQL(?). 

Yes, it's in the patch queue for 8.2, and so far no-one has objected. 

> Someone 
> asked at d.o [1] for a separate packaging of adminpacks. Do 
> you have any idea of the time it can take to get the files 
> included in PostgreSQL contrib? I'm asking about that because 
> I'm not sure it's worth doing the effort of a separate 
> packaging if it get included directly in PostgreSQL rapidly.

It will be for 8.2.

> Something else, it was also suggested that pgagent get 
> included in the adminpacks packages. I was persuaded that 
> pgagent was not related to the version of PostgreSQL used but 
> to the pgAdmin's one. Can you teach me please?
> 
> Regards,
> Raph
> [1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=354731

Yes, pgAgent is technically linked to pgAdmin's version, but I hope not to have to make any incompatible changes to the data format so version mixing shouldn't be a problem. There are no known bugs in pgAgent, and no changes planned for 1.6, so that should certainly be the case for the next release at least.

As for the packaging, normally we ship pgAgent with pgAdmin. There's a couple of vague reasons for that - partly that it's the easiest route, and partly that pgAgent is designed to run on multiple nodes if required so that you can schedule batch jobs on any of them, or distribute compute intensive stuff. That said, most people would probably run it on their server anyway for more simple stuff like data summarisation tasks or backups. It's really up to you how you ship it I guess.

Regards, Dave.

pgadmin-hackers by date

Next:From: Dave PageDate: 2006-05-09 07:54:57
Subject: Re: Adminpack contrib module
Previous:From: Dave PageDate: 2006-05-09 07:19:32
Subject: Re: i18n online documentation

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group