Re: PostgreSql and VMS operating System

From: Vish Penmetsa <vish(dot)penmetsa(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Christophe Pettus <christophe(dot)pettus(at)pgexperts(dot)com>, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>, pgsql-advocacy(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: PostgreSql and VMS operating System
Date: 2025-01-24 23:21:31
Message-ID: CAF14C7CZYiu8DgEr0mpnsfN5Phaz6W_qnOkK=X=T42uDYB2jTQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy

I used to work in Ingres support and one of the things was teaching
Architecture of Ingres( seminar so just theory without handson ) .Coming
from a trainer( dong tech support training on site consulting etc) people
might have seen as shallow my discussions about advanced features of VMS.

I will try to start working on this and probably note the features which
justify
the port with some comparative findings) and see if that could get more
people interested.

On Sat, Jan 25, 2025, 03:39 Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:

> Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> > On Fri, Jan 24, 2025 at 01:07:56AM -0800, Christophe Pettus wrote:
> >> So, basically, if you want a maintained VMS port, you need to either
> drive the project yourself, or find others who will.
>
> > This email thread from 2003 says VMS probably doesn't work anymore
> > because of lack of testers:
> >
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/200301071531.h07FVWI08147%40candle.pha.pa.us#0dbc1439f51ec7842125fb8ae200b6da
>
> I doubt we ever had a working VMS port. There are precisely zero
> references to VMS in our commit log, so certainly there was never one
> that got removed. It's barely possible that PG "just worked" without
> any patches under their POSIX emulation layer, but I could not find
> any indication of successful users of PG-on-VMS in the mail list
> archives either.
>
> What I did find was occasional suggestions that we port to OpenVMS [1].
> But nobody ever showed up to do the work, and the last such discussion
> was in 2011.
>
> Given that, I really doubt that there is critical mass to support
> a port to VMS. It's not enough to just show up with a patch for
> such a port: there has to be an ongoing commitment to fix problems,
> run buildfarm animals, and so on, and that takes multiple interested
> people over a long period. (I think it is pretty much exactly this
> point that is the stumbling block for the current discussion about
> whether to reinstate the AIX port [2]: there's nearly zero community
> enthusiasm about AIX.)
>
> Feel free to prove me wrong, but it's going to be a uphill climb.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
> [1] https://www.postgresql.org/search/?m=1&q=openvms+port&l=&d=-1&s=d
> [2]
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/CY5PR11MB63928CC05906F27FB10D74D0FD322(at)CY5PR11MB6392(dot)namprd11(dot)prod(dot)outlook(dot)com
>

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-advocacy by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Adrian Klaver 2025-01-24 23:49:11 Re: PostgreSql and VMS operating System
Previous Message Tom Lane 2025-01-24 22:09:37 Re: PostgreSql and VMS operating System