Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: [HACKERS] NT port of PGSQL - success

From: "Thomas G(dot) Lockhart" <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu>
To: Horak Daniel <horak(at)mmp(dot)plzen-city(dot)cz>
Cc: "'Bruce Momjian'" <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)hub(dot)org, JKraaijeveld(at)askesis(dot)nl
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] NT port of PGSQL - success
Date: 1998-10-08 15:36:09
Message-ID: 361CDBE9.EB6625AB@alumni.caltech.edu (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
> The problem is that there exists file PG_VERSION where is the current
> version stored (now 6.4) in the directory ./data/base/template1 and 
> when the bootstrap code wants to create pg_version system table it 
> stops because the file with the "same" name already exists.
> I think we should wait for the final 6.4 version (I hope it will be 
> soon available) and than make a patch against it and include it also 
> in the 6.5 development tree.

Most of us aren't NT propellerheads, but now that a port might be
available I'm sure the mailing lists will get more folks who are. Then a
tremendous step forward such as you've take will be greeted with more
enthusiasm :)

> There are some open issues yet.
> now some explanations:
> - int8 - the libc does probably have no support for long long ints in
> printf()

There is a local definition for snprintf() which might have this support
for you. Look in backend/port/snprintf.c

> - run_ruletest - the difference is only in the name that is selected
> from the tables
> - many other tests failed due to not having the dynamicly loaded code 
> in DLLs

Is DLL support so different that it will never work, or have you not had
time to look at it?

I would like to list NT as being "supported with patches, see web site"
for the next release (or "partially supported..."). Is it premature to
do that?

Good work btw...

                    - Tom

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 1998-10-08 15:36:53
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] NT port of PGSQL - success
Previous:From: Horak DanielDate: 1998-10-08 09:26:15
Subject: RE: [HACKERS] NT port of PGSQL - success

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group