Re: Any Good Way To Do Sync DB's?

Your solution sounds very interesting (Not the throw away NT
part...)...does anyone else have any input on this? Would it work well?
Any idea as to what amount of traffic it would be capable of handling?
If apache is only running in two instances, would that really keep the
number of ODBC connections to 2 at max? By the way, I fully agree with
throwing away NT -- unfortunately this DB is part of their inventory and
POS system that another company set up for them. They just finished
investing about $200K in the system, so just telling them to get rid of
it isn't quite an answer. Thanks for all of the input from everyone.

Joe

Gordan Bobic wrote:
>
> On Fri, 12 Oct 2001, Joseph Koenig wrote:
>
> > I have a project where a client has products stored in a large Progress
> > DB on an NT server. The web server is a FreeBSD box though, and the
> > client wants to try to avoid the $5,500 license for the Unlimited
> > Connections via OpenLink software and would like to take advantage of
> > the 'free' non-expiring 2 connection (concurrent) license. This wouldn't
> > be a huge problem, but the DB can easily reach 1 million records. Is
> > there any good way to pull this data out of Progess and get it into
> > Postgres? This is way too large of a db to do a "SELECT * FROM table"
> > and do an insert for each row. Any brilliant ideas? Thanks,
>
> Yes. Throw away NT, and replace it with Linux or FreeBSD. They are free,
> they are much more stable, and you will find that PostgreSQL on Linux is
> likely to utterly blow away PostgreSQL on NT. IIRC, something to do with
> the way NT handles forking and threads. Allegedly, this is particularly
> noticeable in a heavy multi-user environment, where lots of connections
> are spawned and killed.
>
> Another thing you could try - Apache persistent DBI connections using
> mod_perl. Set up Apache to use mod_perl and the persistent DBI database
> connections through it. Then limit the number of Apache instances to 2
> (i.e. up to 2 simultaneous connections). Then put an accelerating
> squid proxy in front of the Apache web server, so that it can handle
> static objects without wasting precious Apache back-ends.
>
> All this seems like a hugely complicated solution when you could just
> replace NT with Linux or FreeBSD and have a cheaper and MUCH faster
> sollution, not to mention more stable.
>
> Just my $0.02
>
> Regards.
>
> Gordan
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
> (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org)