Mailing List Archive: Bricolage: users

apache 2.0

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

john.durkin at gmail

Jul 20, 2005, 4:11 PM

Post #1 of 9 (1805 views)
Permalink

apache 2.0

is the next version of bric gonna work with apache 2.0? i failed to
notice that current vers. doesn't work with 2.0... until trying to
build bric.

i don't even care or know the real differences between 1.3.x and 2.0 -
i just installed (by habit) the latest stable version of apache when
setting up for bric. now i get the darn error and i notice that there
isn't apache 2.0 support yet, so i'm about to rebuild.

what about pgsql? is 8.0.3 okay? when trying to build bric it said
that 8.0.3 was acceptable - but *is it really?* or am i going to have
to remove that too and install 7.4.5 or something?

best,
john d.

david at kineticode

Jul 20, 2005, 5:30 PM

Post #2 of 9 (1718 views)
Permalink

Re: apache 2.0 [In reply to]

On Jul 20, 2005, at 5:11 PM, John Durkin wrote:

> is the next version of bric gonna work with apache 2.0? i failed to
> notice that current vers. doesn't work with 2.0... until trying to
> build bric.

1.10 won't, but 1.12 should.

> i don't even care or know the real differences between 1.3.x and 2.0 -
> i just installed (by habit) the latest stable version of apache when
> setting up for bric. now i get the darn error and i notice that there
> isn't apache 2.0 support yet, so i'm about to rebuild.

Adding Apache 2 support is a Google Summer of Code project. I believe
that Scott Loyd is making progress on it.

> what about pgsql? is 8.0.3 okay? when trying to build bric it said
> that 8.0.3 was acceptable - but *is it really?* or am i going to have
> to remove that too and install 7.4.5 or something?

It didn't lie to you. I use 8.0.3 myself.

Best,

David

JHanback at nashvillescene

Jul 20, 2005, 5:36 PM

Post #3 of 9 (1712 views)
Permalink

RE: apache 2.0 [In reply to]

Speaking of postgresql 8.0.3, does anyone have any Bricolage/postgresql
tuning tips specific to that version they would be willing to share?

The Bricolage API db admin docs say that the tuning recommendations therein
are for postgresql 7.3 and 7.4, and that the suggestions would be vastly
differente for 8.0.x. I suppose I'm just looking for some generic bric/pgsql
8.0 rules of thumb for optimizing the user experience.

Thanks for any advice.

-----Original Message-----
From: David Wheeler [mailto:david [at] kineticode]
Sent: Wed 7/20/2005 8:30 PM
To: john.durkin [at] aya
Cc: Bricolage Users
Subject: Re: apache 2.0

On Jul 20, 2005, at 5:11 PM, John Durkin wrote:

> is the next version of bric gonna work with apache 2.0? i failed to
> notice that current vers. doesn't work with 2.0... until trying to
> build bric.

1.10 won't, but 1.12 should.

> i don't even care or know the real differences between 1.3.x and 2.0 -
> i just installed (by habit) the latest stable version of apache when
> setting up for bric. now i get the darn error and i notice that there
> isn't apache 2.0 support yet, so i'm about to rebuild.

Adding Apache 2 support is a Google Summer of Code project. I believe
that Scott Loyd is making progress on it.

> what about pgsql? is 8.0.3 okay? when trying to build bric it said
> that 8.0.3 was acceptable - but *is it really?* or am i going to have
> to remove that too and install 7.4.5 or something?

It didn't lie to you. I use 8.0.3 myself.

Best,

David

david at kineticode

Jul 21, 2005, 7:03 AM

Post #4 of 9 (1719 views)
Permalink

Re: apache 2.0 [In reply to]

On Jul 20, 2005, at 6:36 PM, James Hanback wrote:

> Speaking of postgresql 8.0.3, does anyone have any Bricolage/
> postgresql
> tuning tips specific to that version they would be willing to share?
>
> The Bricolage API db admin docs say that the tuning
> recommendations therein
> are for postgresql 7.3 and 7.4, and that the suggestions would be
> vastly
> differente for 8.0.x. I suppose I'm just looking for some generic
> bric/pgsql
> 8.0 rules of thumb for optimizing the user experience.

Actually, it turned out that they're not all that different. The one
major difference is that sort_mem is now called work_mem, but you
tune it the same way.

See also

http://www.powerpostgresql.com/

Best,

David

michael.fletcher at cbs

Jun 23, 2009, 7:51 AM

Post #5 of 9 (1724 views)
Permalink

Re: apache 2.0 [In reply to]

I noticed this thread is several years old, so I thought I'd ask - is
Apache 2 supported in Bricolage 1.10.7?

Thanks,
Mike

david at kineticode

Jun 23, 2009, 7:56 AM

Post #6 of 9 (1714 views)
Permalink

Re: apache 2.0 [In reply to]

On Jun 23, 2009, at 7:51 AM, Fletcher, Michael wrote:

> I noticed this thread is several years old, so I thought I'd ask - is
> Apache 2 supported in Bricolage 1.10.7?

No, but it is in 1.11.x.

Best,

David

michael.fletcher at cbs

Jun 23, 2009, 8:27 AM

Post #7 of 9 (1712 views)
Permalink

RE: apache 2.0 [In reply to]

Please excuse my ignorance here. Why is 1.11.1 called "Bricolage-Devel"
and not listed in the left side list of downloads? Does that mean it's
not stable? Should I be able to configure and install it just as I
would a 1.10 release?

Thanks,
Mike

-----Original Message-----
From: David E. Wheeler [mailto:david [at] kineticode]
Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2009 7:57 AM
To: users [at] lists
Subject: Re: apache 2.0

On Jun 23, 2009, at 7:51 AM, Fletcher, Michael wrote:

> I noticed this thread is several years old, so I thought I'd ask - is
> Apache 2 supported in Bricolage 1.10.7?

No, but it is in 1.11.x.

Best,

David

david at kineticode

Jun 23, 2009, 8:53 AM

Post #8 of 9 (1713 views)
Permalink

Re: apache 2.0 [In reply to]

On Jun 23, 2009, at 8:27 AM, Fletcher, Michael wrote:

> Please excuse my ignorance here. Why is 1.11.1 called "Bricolage-
> Devel"
> and not listed in the left side list of downloads? Does that mean
> it's
> not stable? Should I be able to configure and install it just as I
> would a 1.10 release?

Yes, it's a development release. But you should be able to install it
just like 1.10. If you're upgrading from 1.10, you'll have to do some
configuration tweaking to switch to Apache 2.

Best,

David

michael.fletcher at cbs

Jun 23, 2009, 9:00 AM

Post #9 of 9 (1721 views)
Permalink

RE: apache 2.0 [In reply to]

It's a fresh install on a brand-new server.
Thanks for your help as always.

Mike

-----Original Message-----
From: David E. Wheeler [mailto:david [at] kineticode]
Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2009 8:53 AM
To: users [at] lists
Subject: Re: apache 2.0

On Jun 23, 2009, at 8:27 AM, Fletcher, Michael wrote:

> Please excuse my ignorance here. Why is 1.11.1 called "Bricolage-
> Devel"
> and not listed in the left side list of downloads? Does that mean
> it's not stable? Should I be able to configure and install it just as

> I would a 1.10 release?

Yes, it's a development release. But you should be able to install it
just like 1.10. If you're upgrading from 1.10, you'll have to do some
configuration tweaking to switch to Apache 2.

Best,

David

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads