Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Not 7.5, but 8.0 ?

From: ow <oneway_111(at)yahoo(dot)com>
To: Dann Corbit <DCorbit(at)connx(dot)com>, Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>, Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Not 7.5, but 8.0 ?
Date: 2003-11-18 16:39:29
Message-ID: 20031118163929.70058.qmail@web21403.mail.yahoo.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

--- Dann Corbit <DCorbit(at)connx(dot)com> wrote:
> Which feature is requested more than that?

Not sure how often features are requested and by whom. However, if you take a
look at the TODO list, you'll find plenty of stuff more important than win32
port.

> Of the following (which includes every significant DBMS in terms of
> market share), which did not consider a native Windows port to be
> important:
> SQL*Sever (all right, we can discount this one...)
> DB/2
> Oracle
> MySQL
> Sybase
> Informix

Have *never* seen ppl running Oracle or Sybase on Windows. Not sure about DB/2
or Informix, never worked with them, but I'd suspect the picture is the same.
They may claim that they have win port but it's more of a marketing gimmick
than a useful feature that affects real, not hypothetical, users.

IMHO, core postgreSql development should not be sacrificed for the sake of
win32 port.

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Rocco Altier 2003-11-18 16:51:44 Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Not 7.5, but 8.0 ?
Previous Message Marc G. Fournier 2003-11-18 16:37:10 Re: [HACKERS] Is there going to be a port to Solaris 9 x86 in the