Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes:
> mlw <markw@mohawksoft.com> writes:
> > I have used the cygwin version too. It is a waste of time. No Windows
user will
> > ever accept it. No windows-only user is going to use the cygwin tools.
>
> With decent packaging, no windows-only user would even know we have
> cygwin in there. The above argument is just plain irrelevant. The real
> point is that we need a nice clean friendly GUI for both installation
> and administration --- and AFAICS that will take about the same amount of
> work to write whether the server requires cygwin internally or not.
I'm afraid I agree with mlw, Tom. I don't think the problem ends at the GUI,
although for many people it would. The issue extends at least also to
support and troubleshooting. In a production environment, I have a better
chance of figuring out what's going wrong with an application written
natively for an operating system dealing directly with that operating
system. I would take a dim view of using PostgreSQL running on cygwin unless
I had extensive experience doing it, or if there were no other alternative.
> > From a production stand point, would anyone reading this trust their
> > data to PostgreSQL running on cygwin?
>
> I wouldn't trust my data to *any* database running on a Microsoft OS.
> Period. The above argument thus doesn't impress me at all, especially
> when it's being made without offering a shred of evidence that cygwin
> contributes any major degree of instability.
If you could prove to me that cygwin doesn't contribute *any* instability,
I'd still be pretty worried, probably for the same reasons that you don't
trust any Microsoft OS. There are increased chances that something could go
critically wrong, particularly in an environment fundamentally different. I
think mlw's basic point is quite valid, that PG+cygwin will not ever find
favor with decision-makers who are used to Windows systems. Suspicion of
the other environment's foibles is common, and goes both ways.
> I am especially unhappy about the prospect of major code revisions
> and development time spent on chasing this rather than improving our
> performance and stability on Unix-type OSes. I agree with the comment
> someone else made: that's just playing Microsoft's game.
There I don't deny you may be right.
Ernie Gutierrez
Walnut Creek, CA
