Jan Wieck wrote:
> On 8/14/2004 5:26 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > Chris Travers wrote:
> >> > Please stop looking at Afilias as a 3rd party. Afilias is a member of
> >> > the PGDG as everyone else. The problem that even people inside of this
> >> > community can't imagine a company being just a member of this team
> >> > doesn't mean that it is impossible.
> >> >
> >> While you have a valid point from the perspective of the community, I
> >> think there is an issue which is legitimate here. That is that people
> >> see the fact that Slony does not come with the PostgreSQL tarball. From
> >> this perspective "we" do not have a "replication" solution. Like it or
> >> not, this is a viewpoint many evaluators have. To them, this is still a
> >> third-party add-on, even though it was developed primarily by core
> >> members of the PostgreSQL community.
> >>
> >> How do we combat this issue? Do we release Slony with PostgreSQL? Does
> >> that really make sense (the general concensus seems to be "no")? Do we
> >> release a different distribution of PostgreSQL which includes Slony? I
> >> think that this would be a good idea, but....
> >>
> >> Also, will it be possible to see a Win32 port of Slony at some point?
> >
> > Why would Slony _not_ work on Win32? Has anyone tested it?
> >
>
> Windows doesn't have pthreads. The thread usage in Slony is very basic,
> nothing really pthread specific. So I don't think there'd be a big issue
> in porting it. But it hasn't been done yet.
Ah, OK. libpq is Win32 thread-safe, but doesn't use pthreads on Win32
so it would require some work to add Win32 thread calls to Slony.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
