| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>, Dann Corbit <DCorbit(at)connx(dot)com>, Rayson Ho <raysonlogin(at)gmail(dot)com>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, PG Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: OpenVMS? |
| Date: | 2010-02-16 22:54:14 |
| Message-ID: | 18543.1266360854@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> Marc G. Fournier wrote:
>> On Tue, 16 Feb 2010, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>>> I hate to pour cold water on this, but why is it worth adding support
>>> for a platform that has such marginal usage.
>>
>> Because someone feels like dedicating their resources to it ... ?
> Well, there is going to be impact on the community too --- patches,
> testing, etc. The community effort is small, but isn't zero.
No, I suspect the community effort would be *large*. VMS is
sufficiently unlike Unix that this port would probably be akin to the
Windows port in terms of invasiveness, fragility, and general need
for everyone to bend over backwards for it. The discussion about
fork substitutes should give you some idea of what we'd be in for.
I think the odds of getting the community to support such a port
are not easily distinguishable from zero, and I agree with Bruce's
desire to dissuade anyone from pouring effort down the drain.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2010-02-16 23:01:34 | Re: PostgreSQL::PLPerl::Call - Simple interface for calling SQL functions from PostgreSQL PL/Perl |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2010-02-16 22:41:23 | Re: Listen / Notify - what to do when the queue is full |