Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Oct 2003, Jeff Davis wrote:
>>I bet the win32 port will help advocacy a lot. The other thing that
>>would help I think would be to make it as friendly as possible for ISPs
>>to do virtual hosting. Schemas are probably helping that a lot already,
>>and the only other thing I can think of in that area would be resource
>>monitoring/control. I'm not suggesting that MySQL is better for virtual
>>hosting, but perhaps if PostgreSQL makes it easier than that will give
>>us an edge.
> 'K, I've been doing virtual hosting with PostgreSQL for 8 years now (god,
> I feel old) ... what is hard about it?
> In fact, we run MySQL (ack!) for some clients, due to their requirements,
> and with the recent changes in our IPs, we're having a bugger of a time
> with IP based access and getting those clients switched to the new IPs
> then we had with PostgreSQL (MySQL uses an SQL based ACL system for
> connections, apparently, vs our 'text based, sed changable pg_hb.conf
> file') ...
Once, I've asked about the pg_hb.conf file ....
IMHO, writing an app for parsing/editing that file *may* be a problem
for those who develop control panels used by web hosting companies ....
IMHO, moving the info in pg_hb.conf into the DB itself may attract
control panel developers.
In response to
pgsql-advocacy by date
|Next:||From: Christopher Browne||Date: 2003-10-15 20:16:59|
|Previous:||From: Jeff Davis||Date: 2003-10-15 18:59:45|
|Subject: Re: MySQL interview, no mention of PostgreSQL|