From: | Stephen Robert Norris <srn(at)commsecure(dot)com(dot)au> |
---|---|
To: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Cc: | "Gavin M(dot) Roy" <gmr(at)ehpg(dot)net>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: SCO Extortion |
Date: | 2004-01-21 03:05:14 |
Message-ID: | 1074654314.20961.2.camel@ws12.commsecure.com.au |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Wed, 2004-01-21 at 11:55, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Jan 2004, Gavin M. Roy wrote:
>
> > I'm currently one of the targets of SCO's linux licensing extortion
> > business plan, and am contemplating switching to one of the BSD's to
> > avoid any potential problems. I'm curious which BSD people prefer for
> > large scale databases and why. Any pointers as to which I should test out?
>
> for the longest time, the BSDs have been split as:
>
> FreeBSD - i386 rock solid
> NetBSD - work on as many platforms as possible
> OpenBSD - be as secure as possible
>
> There is alot of code sharing between them all though, so, IMHO, alot of
> it is personal preferences ... I've been using FreeBSD since '95, and
> other then having a habit of finding (and, usually pushing) its limits,
> I've been most happy with it ...
>
>
> ----
> Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
> Email: scrappy(at)hub(dot)org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your
> joining column's datatypes do not match
Of course SCO is planning to sue the BSD users, too, so it's not really
a solution.
Just ignore them :)
Stephen
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Marc G. Fournier | 2004-01-21 04:21:46 | Re: SCO Extortion |
Previous Message | Gavin M. Roy | 2004-01-21 02:16:46 | Re: SCO Extortion |