Re: PostgreSQL still for Linux only? - Mailing list pgsql-general

Tope Akinniyi wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> In my country Nigeria (and even African continent), we do not eat
> what the western world eat. We wear different styles of cloths. In
> the same vein, our computerisation culture is different.
>
> I must submit that computers became popular in Nigeria by Windows
> desktop system. While the western world were exposed to *NIX from the
> beginning, we were introduced to computing via DOS and later Windows.
> That is our IT antecedent and culture. People use database engines
> such as Oracle, Firebird, Sybase, mySQL, etc on Windows here and they
> manage them and survive. If because you want to recommend PostgreSQL,
> you insist on Non-Windows OS, the first question clients ask you is
> why is your own different? Why must I switch from Windows to *NIX
> because of your PostgreSQL? You might end up not succeeding in that
> bid. And we are used to the blue screen (crashes) and each IT house
> in Nigeria has gone the extra mile to ensure the safety of the
> operations of its clients. Everyone is a product of his environment,
> peculiarities and experiences.

Not that different from Europe, or I'd guess the U.S. - in many small
businesses "computers" mean "Windows". Certainly five year ago customers
looked at you funny if you wanted to run on Linux/*BSD.

> As an IT organisation that wants to stay in business you need to give
> to people what they wants.  I think that is the basis of service. I
> have some deployments of PostgreSQL on Windows servers. I must admit
> that we have not had any problems so far.
>
> Notwithstanding, due efforts must be made to protect your clients'
> operations whether you use Windows or Posix. In that regards, I
> thought of reducing the risk factor by implementing replication on
> some of the servers.
>
> I sought Windows replication tool for and could not get.  I checked
> PgFoundry and the one there put a banner and said NOT FOR WINDOWS.
> Then I said is this PostgreSQL for Windows a joke?  That prompted my
> post - IS POSTGRESQL FOR LINUX ONLY?
>
> Now, as the CEO of an IT organisation, I want to draft my final
> blueprint on PostgreSQL.  I need your advice on this.
>
> 1. If I can manage it, can I continue to use PostgreSQL on Windows
> and watch as it evolves? I recognise the points certain respondents
> made on earlier; which was PostgreSQL on Windows is still a baby boy,
> do not expect it to walk like a man or expect it to possess the
> features of a man.

Nobody can stop you using PostgreSQL. Ever. Or from giving it away,
making changes, selling it etc.

> 2. This response is alarming: Tom Lane wrote in digest V1.5092:
>
>> We are supporting Windows as a Postgres platform for the benefit of
>> developers who want to do testing on their laptops (and for reasons
>> best known to themselves feel a need to run >Windows on their
>> laptops).
>
>
> a. Who are the 'we' Tom is talking about?

In an email in the public lists we = Tom

 > b. Is he speaking for
> PostgreSQL Developers and the entire PostgreSQL community?

Official pronouncements from "core" will be marked as such. No-one
speaks for the "entire" PostgreSQL community. You're part of that
community, just by virtue of downloading a copy and subscribing to the
lists.

 > c. Does
> this mean that PostgreSQL for Windows is just a toy or model - Oh do
> not take it serious? Or is the Windows version by design a miniature
> of the *NIX version, lacking the requisite mechanism of a reliable
> database?

The core of PostgreSQL is the same in both versions. It is the
connection to the operating-system that differs. There has been a lot of
work put in to get it running on Windows (otherwise it would have
happened before version 8). It will take time to understand how best to
adapt to this new environment, and it may be that *nix systems are
always better to run on.

 > d. And does that mean the developers can decide to withdraw
 > development and support for the Windows version anytime they so wish?

Yes. Short of kidnapping them and torturing them, no-one can force them
to work. However, some of them get paid to work on PostgreSQL, and all
of them are interested in it.

> I am not against Linux or any Posix for any reason.  In fact one of
> my two office servers run Mandrake Linux. But I am grateful that
> PostgreSQL recognises the fact that we all can and will not be in the
> same boat. So it is good to support many boats.

It can also be bad - the more time spent supporting Windows, the less
time is spent working on PostgreSQL itself.

> Tom lane's post is worrisome to me. It bothers on consistency. Would
> PostgreSQL be consistent for Windows?  If not, I think at this stage
> I can easily roll back and migrate my clients back to other Windows
> Database system where I feel I will be secured for some time to come
> as using PostgreSQL does not affect much of my operations.  I am just
> expanding my varieties.

Sorry - I'm not sure I understand this paragraph. The code for
PostgreSQL is the same in both cases - is that what you mean?

> I think managing PostgreSQL on OS I desire should be my own duty. The
> point is that PostgreSQL can be available for what I choose to use it
> for and where I choose to use it. Managing failure points of my OS
> should be left to my technical expertise. Well if I can get some
> support from some sources, fine.
>
> Off the topic: --> Uwe C. Schroeder wrote:
>
>> I think it could even damage the quite good reputation of
>> PostgreSQL - if your windows box >crashes and takes the DB with it
>> - most likely it's not the fault of a lousy OS, nor the fault of
>> >an incompetent sysadmin who forgot to make backups - it will be
>> this "shitty" free database >system that's to blame.
>
>
> I do not seem to be comfortable with this "Windows will spoil
> PostgreSQL reputation position" as posted by Schroeder. Is PostgreSQL
> the only database engine running on Windows? There are million of
> licences of Oracle, mySQL, Sybase, etc for Windows servers. The
> company that uses them are up and running; not as if only
> organisations running DB on Posix are existing. Who blames mySQL or
> Oracle when it crashes on Windows OS?

If a crash occurs on a machine, it is always easier to blame the newer
element. Especially if the person setting up the system is inexperienced
or poorly trained. In Europe and USA there are a *lot* of inexperienced
Windows sysadmin's and fewer Unix ones. Traditionally, Unix machines
were large and expensive and people looking after them were
knowledgeable and well-paid.

Also, very few people are using Windows to run "serious" systems by the
definitions of some people on these lists. A lot of big, expensive
machines have only ever run one of the Unix variants.

 > If PostgreSQL cannot thrive
> where others thrive, it will be quite unfortunate. You cannot shut
> yourself indoors because you anticipate a rainfall (that might not
> come). What would be the empirical basis for our judgement if
> PostgreSQL is not used on Windows? Crashing MS Office on Windows is a
> different situation from what you would get running PostgreSQL. I do
> often witness many utility *NIX applications do crash on our Mandrake
> server, but not PostgreSQL crashing. <--

If you have many applications crashing, you probably have hardware
problems, a bad installation or run a lot of unstable software. You
shouldn't have programs crashing on a server.

> I will appreciate your kind response on this before I finally take my
> decision on whether to continue with PostgreSQL for Windows for now.

That's clearly a decision only you can make. Getting replication working
on Windows will happen quicker the more people help. If all you want is
an off-machine backup, perhaps look at PITR (see manuals for details).

> Thank you all.
>
> NB.
>
> 1. Magnus Handler's late submission is highly appreciated.
>
> 2. I or someone else might have been rude by the post. Sorry to all
> about that. I accept responsibility for all that. But if you call
> someone a thief because he stole $1, what do you call yourself when
> you steal $2? Oh, I was disturbed reading Tony's reaction. Quite
> outrageous, intolerant and immature. I believe mailing list concept
> like this is all about education and guidance - Oh, take this way do
> not take this way. Share from my experience and so on.

As someone who's been on these lists for several years now, I can
honestly say they're among the friendliest and most helpful I've found.

One of the problems that do occur from time to time though is with
different uses of English from around the world. Here is how your
original message will have looked to many people:

-- Original message below: commentary in []--
I am wondering at this display of extreme Linux mentality being
displayed by the 'top bras' of the PostgreSQL community.  And I ask, are
we encouraging Windows use of PostgreSQL at all?
[The people behind PostgreSQL are extremists. Also lazy or misguided]

Take a look at tools being rolled out at PgFoundry on daily basis; all
for Linux except the Windows installer.
[There is a deliberate neglect of Windows]
I ask myself what is being done to encourage PostgreSQL Windows users.
[The community is lazy, or what they're doing is foolish]
Nothing is available to them except the Database and PgAdmin.
[The database/pgadmin are not large projects with a lot of work.
ODBC/.Net/OLE projects are not even worthy of mention]
No replication tool, no this, no that.
[You should all stop what you are doing and work on Windows tools for me]

I was troubled when CommandPrompt, the leading Windows support provider
responded to a post that their plPHP is for Linux only.

Sorry for this:  Firebird provides equal tools for Linux and Windows
users.  We are not the one to tell the Windows users whether they need them.
[I don't need you anyway - Firebird is better]

Whether Windows is bad or good; Linux is the angel and Windows the devil
is not the issue here. PostgreSQL has gone the Windows way and must not
be shown to be deficient.
[PostgreSQL is primarily a Windows application now. People interested in
running on *nix should stop being so selfish.]

I am not holding anybody responsible, but I think we need to do a
massive re-orientation of the community not to carry the Linux-Windows
game too far.
[You are clearly not responsible for your actions, you have all been
misguided. Luckily, I am here now and if you'll all stop what you're
doing and do what I say then everything will be alright]
-- End of original message --

Now, I've been negative in the commentary there - but to many of the
readers that is how it will have looked.

You clearly didn't intend to cause offence, but on an international list
you need to be careful with your choice of words, and allow for the fact
that many of your readers will be at the end of a long day of hard work.

To many people on the list, it will be the first time they have seen
your name. As far as they were concerned you had a Nigerian
company-name, with a UK (free) email address and with your first email
have criticised the project, its developers, the wider community and
their operating-system of choice. They then assumed you were just a
student somewhere causing trouble (there are unfortunately plenty of
people who like nothing more than "trolling" public lists to cause a fuss).

And, if you really want to see PostgreSQL on Windows encouraged, your
best bet is to volunteer yourself. PG has only been running on Windows
for a couple of months and someone is going to be Nigeria's leading
expert on running PostgreSQL on Windows. Would you like it to be you?

--
   Richard Huxton
   Archonet Ltd