On Thu, 3 Aug 2000, Tom Lane wrote:
> Mike Mascari <mascarm(at)mascari(dot)com> writes:
> > Please don't. It seems true that Microsoft has enabled a mode for
> > SQL Server, but the main problem was Access. And Access 95/97 has
> > a huge installed base of users that would not be able to use its
> > automated query tools with PostgreSQL.
> That was what I was afraid of :-(. Question though: if MS has changed
> the default behavior of their server to be (more) SQL-compliant, aren't
> these folks being forced to update their Access installs anyway?
> Presumably those old versions do not know how to select the non-default
> behavior of SQL Server, so they're gonna be incompatible with newer
> servers despite the nominal presence of a workaround.
> I've got no objection to leaving in the kluge for another release or two
> if there's still a big installed base that needs it --- but I don't want
> to leave it there indefinitely for the benefit of a few tail-end
> Charlies. Seems like folks running obsolete Access code are unlikely
> to pick up the latest Postgres either, so will it really matter if we
that was my opinion ... if these ppl are already using it for talking to
PostgreSQL., they have to be running a current release of it with the
kludge inplace ... we're only preventing PostgreSQL admin from being able
to upgrade while their clients are still stuck with the older Access ...
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Mark Hollomon||Date: 2000-08-03 20:23:56|
|Subject: Re: Toasting more system-table columns|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2000-08-03 20:12:52|
|Subject: Re: comparing rows |