Re: Win32 Powerfail testing - results - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Dave Page
Subject Re: Win32 Powerfail testing - results
Date
Msg-id 03AF4E498C591348A42FC93DEA9661B885A5@mail.vale-housing.co.uk
Whole thread Raw
In response to Win32 Powerfail testing - results  ("Dave Page" <dpage@vale-housing.co.uk>)
List pgsql-hackers

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hannu Krosing [mailto:hannu@tm.ee]
> Sent: 03 February 2003 22:30
> To: Dave Page
> Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers; Katie Ward
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Win32 Powerfail testing - results
>
>
> Your hardware should also be able to run Postgres on BeOS
>
> http://www.bebits.com/app/2752
>
> Being the only non-unix "port" before/besides win32, it could
> be an interesting excercise.

One that will have to go untested I'm afraid. These tests take a fair
while and you know how many pies I've got my fingers in right now just
on this project, never mind my paying gig and Uni!!

> > Windows 2000 Testing
> > ====================
>
> Is this NTFS ?

Yes.

> Any possibility of trying the same tests with SCSI disks ?

Depends on my time. I have a couple of 29160's and some Seagate Cheetah
X15's knocking about.

>
> I remember having problems with UNIQUE columns having
> duplicate values a few versions back on Linux-ext2-IDE. Could
> this be the same problem or must it be something completely
> different ?

Pass. I don't know the details of your problem, or how Peerdirect have
handled the IO. If I'm honest, I'm probably not experienced enough in
that sort of thing to know what's going wrong anyway :-(

>
> BTW, are the tests portable enough to run also on MSSQL,
> Oracle and DB2 ?

Well I posted the source. If you pull out the libpq stuff then I guess
so. I only have DB2 and MSSQL here though (and they both fall over at
will anyway). Again though, I can't really spend time testing them just
for interest's sake (not at present anyway).

Regards, Dave.


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Hannu Krosing
Date:
Subject: Re: Win32 Powerfail testing - results
Next
From: wade
Date:
Subject: Re: POSIX regex performance bug in 7.3 Vs. 7.2