| From: | Dave Page <dpage(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Mark Cave-Ayland <mark(dot)cave-ayland(at)ilande(dot)co(dot)uk> |
| Cc: | Robert Bernabe <robert_bernabe(at)yahoo(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Evaluation of PG performance vs MSDE/MSSQL 2000 (not 2005) |
| Date: | 2007-12-06 08:50:56 |
| Message-ID: | 4757B7F0.2030608@postgresql.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Mark Cave-Ayland wrote:
> BTW you mention both EnterpriseDB PostgreSQL 8.3 beta and just
> PostgreSQL 8.3 beta in the text above. Both of these are different -
> which one are you actually using?
No they're not. EnterpriseDB Postgres ships entirely standard binaries -
in fact, the Windows build uses the exact same binaries I build for the
community installer.
EnterpriseDB Postgres is essentially a packaging and bundling project in
which the aim is to provide consistent and easy to use installers for
Windows, Mac and Linux that allow users to get started with Postgres,
Slony, PostGIS, pgAdmin, phpPgAdmin etc...
EnterpriseDB Advanced Server is the entirely different product - thats
the one that includes the Oracle compatibility and replication/migration
tools etc.
Regards, Dave.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2007-12-06 09:38:16 | Re: TB-sized databases |
| Previous Message | Mark Cave-Ayland | 2007-12-06 07:25:12 | Re: Evaluation of PG performance vs MSDE/MSSQL 2000 (not 2005) |