From: | Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | dg(at)illustra(dot)com (David Gould) |
Cc: | phil(at)river-bank(dot)demon(dot)co(dot)uk, tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org, pgsql-interfaces(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Revised proposal for libpq and FE/BE protocol changes |
Date: | 1998-05-22 14:16:03 |
Message-ID: | 199805221416.KAA28979@candle.pha.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-interfaces |
> Database customers at least in the commercial world can be incredibly
> conservative. It is not at all uncommon to have large sites running DBMS
> engines that are three major releases (ie, well over three years) old.
> Once they get an app working, they really don't want anything to change.
Yes, this is true. Their data is locked in Our database. And you can't
just restart it like a PC OS or word processor. Database demands are
much different.
--
Bruce Momjian | 830 Blythe Avenue
maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
+ If your life is a hard drive, | (610) 353-9879(w)
+ Christ can be your backup. | (610) 853-3000(h)
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 1998-05-22 14:16:49 | Re: [HACKERS] Revised proposal for libpq and FE/BE protocol changes |
Previous Message | Andreas Zeugswetter | 1998-05-22 12:56:19 | Re: [HACKERS] sorting big tables :( |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 1998-05-22 14:16:49 | Re: [HACKERS] Revised proposal for libpq and FE/BE protocol changes |
Previous Message | Peter Mount | 1998-05-22 07:53:25 | RE: [INTERFACES] Problem building the JDBC driver |