Re: [mail] Re: Windows Build System

Dave Page wrote:
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us]
> > Sent: 29 January 2003 16:57
> > To: Dave Page
> > Cc: Vince Vielhaber; Katie Ward; Curtis Faith;
> > pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
> > Subject: Re: [mail] Re: [HACKERS] Windows Build System
> >
> >
> > "Dave Page" <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk> writes:
> > > I'll admit my methods were not particularly scientific, but
> > over the
> > > last few weeks I've had far more grief from DB2 and SQL
> > Server than I
> > > did from the PostgreSQL native betas.
> >
> > My gripe had to do with questioning the reliability of the
> > platform, not of the Postgres port ;-).
> >
> > Aside from load testing as suggested by Vince, I'd be
> > interested to hear what happens when you pull the power cord
> > under load (repeatedly). This would give some evidence about
> > the robustness of the Windows filesystem and its ability to
> > emulate Unix sync semantics.
>
> OK, I can maybe do some testing on that next week (I'm off for a few
> days from today). Is there anything in particular I should look out for,
> or that you would want tested?
>
> Katie, can I get the latest build from anywhere?

The code Katie wrote and tested, and what has been posted by me are two
different things. So what has been posted might not be that solid as a
rock as the beta's you got from PeerDirect. I will try to put some
binaries of what I posted together over the weekend.

That said, I don't quite understand the attitude of some people here. Is
it that if the native Win32 port as I posted it isn't as solid and
stable as v7.3 on Unix (well, some flavours), we will have to reject it?
With that ruleset (ruleset, what a word in this context ;-) we would not
have an SQL parser yet ...

Also, so far I have the impression not many people have actually taken a
look at the code itself. Everyone is busy bitching about the build
environment and if it is kosher to cook the code in Cygwin milk on a
Microsoft stove or not. Sorry guy's, but that's not the point! Does
anyone feel that the quality of our mainstream unix product is in
serious danger because of the code changes, required for the Win32 port,
which affect the unix environment? If so, could those please discuss
their feelings with their spouses or shrinks unless they can actually
point at specific areas of the code?

Jan

--
#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
#================================================== JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com #