Re: [HACKERS] Installation procedure.
От | Thomas Lockhart |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Installation procedure. |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 37A51161.55ECF14B@alumni.caltech.edu обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | [HACKERS] Installation procedure. ("J. Michael Roberts" <mirobert@cs.indiana.edu>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] Installation procedure.
Re: [HACKERS] Installation procedure. |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
> You people are harsh. Ooh, a compliment. We live for those... ;) > - initdb complained that it couldn't find a user. I gave it -u postgres. This is the only report of this I can remember (others might remind me otherwise, but...). The best I can tell you somehow didn't have a USER environment variable or mucked around with accounts between building software and trying to initdb. There are several messages from initdb with similar wording but with different diagnostics so you would need to send the actual text or look in the initdb source code yourself (src/bin/initdb/initdb.sh). > - I needed to install flex (no surprise) -- the instructions are quite > explicit, but, well, wrong: flex depends on bison. So you have to get > and compile bison first. Also, the GNU FTP server has "redisorganized" > their file structure, so the very detailed FTP instructions for getting > flex are also outdated. Thanks. Can you give a suggestion for a more helpful phrasing for this, or a better choice of content? > - Being only halfway a sysadmin, I was a little worried about making a > postgres "superuser". I just made a postgres user and didn't worry > about the super part, and it seems to work. Am I missing a point? Only sort of. The "postgres superuser" is a normal user as far as the OS is concerned, but is a superuser as far as the Postgres installation is concerned. Ya done good. > - The aforementioned shared memory problem was distressing. Thank God > somebody else had just encountered it. Is there any better way to > trap for that? Should the default number of backends be made something > less than 32 so that the "common setting" of 1 meg will be safe? Am I > being too wimpy? This is the first release where the shared memory size was actually being calculated correctly. The numbers used pretty much match the theoretical (but incorrectly calculated) maximum limits in previous releases, but the calculated number is bigger and a few OSes seem to cough. Your OS is being wimpy imho, but the workaround is pretty easy. Do you have a specific suggestion for a change here in the docs? Probably no need to change the build procedure, but perhaps a warning about possible startup problems? Have fun with the new toy... - Thomas -- Thomas Lockhart lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu South Pasadena, California
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: