[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kdepim-users
Subject:    Re: [KDE-pim] New Install: AKONADI wit PostgreSQL
From:       "Hessler, Klaus-Michael" <mailinglisten () kmHessler ! de>
Date:       2020-12-23 18:54:23
Message-ID: 22da96b1-5926-3a50-2d49-2d4153944560 () kmHessler ! de
[Download RAW message or body]

Thanks a lot, Ingo!
> It's great that many people in this thread try to help, but I have the 
> impression that Martin (and me) are the only people who have really 
> understood what you, Michael, want to do. I'm not sure whether it's a 
> good idea to use the system PostgreSQL server instead of a standalone one.
> What do you hope to gain by this?
OK, may be my poor understanding: I use PostgreSQL very much with 
different databases, so "my PostgreSQL-server" is running almost 
full-time. In the past I understood from this list, that usage of 
PostgreSQL for Akonadi is the better choice. So _my approach_ was to 
have one server only, for "my usage" and for Akonadi.

Actually (on older hardware) my PostgreSQL-installation has two databases:

  * postgres (the standard one) with scheme public,
  * myDB with several (personal) schemes and public.

My approach for the new setup: Transfer both and add a new one 
"Akonadi".  The reasons for _my understanding_: Less processes running, 
less installation, less update, configuration easier to understand. But: 
If it's preferable have two servers and you recommend this, it can be 
done but I have to understand the install (how to get the PackageManager 
to install the installed package PostgreSQL again?) and update-processes 
for both.

Which solution is your recommendation:
A: One PostgreSQL-installation, three databases: postgres, myDB, Akonadi.
B: One PostgreSQL-installation, two databases: postgres, myDB; let 
Akonadi use postgres.
C: Two PostgreSQL-installations:
C1: Two databases: postgres, myDB;
C2: postgres OR Akonadi for Akonadi

Let's decide this question first!
I've seen, that you already answered my To-Do-list (your mail 18:09 h); 
may be, we can update this after the decision?

Thank you and regards, Michael


[Attachment #3 (text/html)]

<html>
  <head>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
      charset=windows-1252">
  </head>
  <body>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix"><tt>Thanks a lot, Ingo</tt><tt>!<br>
      </tt></div>
    <blockquote type="cite"
      cite="mid:1854386.PYKUYFuaPT@collossus.localdomain"><tt>It's great
        that many people in this thread try to help, but I have the
        impression that Martin (and me) are the only people who have
        really understood what you, Michael, want to do.
        I'm not sure whether it's a good idea to use the system
        PostgreSQL server instead of a standalone one.<br>
        What do you hope to gain by this?</tt><tt><br>
      </tt></blockquote>
    <tt>OK, may be my poor understanding: I use PostgreSQL very much
      with different databases, so "my PostgreSQL-server" is running
      almost full-time. In the past I understood from this list, that
      usage of PostgreSQL for Akonadi is the better choice. So <u>my
        approach</u> was to have one server only, for "my usage" and for
      Akonadi. <br>
      <br>
      Actually (on older hardware) my PostgreSQL-installation has two
      databases: <br>
    </tt>
    <ul>
      <li><tt>postgres (the standard one) with scheme public,<br>
        </tt></li>
      <li><tt>myDB with several (personal) schemes and public.</tt></li>
    </ul>
    <tt>My approach for the new setup: Transfer both and add a new one
      "Akonadi".  The reasons for <u>my understanding</u>: Less
      processes running, less installation, less update, configuration
      easier to understand. But: If it's preferable have two servers and
      you recommend this, it can be done but I have to understand the
      install (how to get the PackageManager to install the installed
      package PostgreSQL again?) and update-processes for both.<br>
      <br>
      Which solution is your recommendation:<br>
      A: One PostgreSQL-installation, three databases: </tt><tt><tt>postgres,
      </tt>myDB, Akonadi.<br>
      B: </tt><tt><tt>One PostgreSQL-installation, two databases:
        postgres, myDB; let Akonadi use postgres.<br>
        C: Two </tt></tt><tt><tt><tt><tt>PostgreSQL-installation</tt></tt></tt></tt><tt>s:<br>
      C1: T</tt><tt><tt><tt>wo databases: postgres, myDB; <br>
          C2: postgres OR Akonadi for Akonadi <br>
        </tt></tt></tt><tt><br>
      Let's decide this question first! </tt><tt><br>
    </tt><tt>I've seen, that you already answered my To-Do-list (your
      mail 18:09 h); may be, we can update this after the decision?</tt><tt><br>
    </tt><tt><br>
    </tt><tt>Thank you and regards, Michael</tt><tt><br>
    </tt><br>
  </body>
</html>


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]

Configure | About | News | Add a list | Sponsored by KoreLogic