I used to work in Ingres support and one of the things was teaching Architecture of Ingres( seminar so just theory without handson ) .Coming from a trainer( dong tech support training on site consulting etc) people might have seen as shallow my discussions about advanced features of VMS.
I will try to start working on this and probably note the features which justify
the port with some comparative findings) and see if that could get more people interested.
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes: > On Fri, Jan 24, 2025 at 01:07:56AM -0800, Christophe Pettus wrote: >> So, basically, if you want a maintained VMS port, you need to either drive the project yourself, or find others who will.
I doubt we ever had a working VMS port. There are precisely zero references to VMS in our commit log, so certainly there was never one that got removed. It's barely possible that PG "just worked" without any patches under their POSIX emulation layer, but I could not find any indication of successful users of PG-on-VMS in the mail list archives either.
What I did find was occasional suggestions that we port to OpenVMS [1]. But nobody ever showed up to do the work, and the last such discussion was in 2011.
Given that, I really doubt that there is critical mass to support a port to VMS. It's not enough to just show up with a patch for such a port: there has to be an ongoing commitment to fix problems, run buildfarm animals, and so on, and that takes multiple interested people over a long period. (I think it is pretty much exactly this point that is the stumbling block for the current discussion about whether to reinstate the AIX port [2]: there's nearly zero community enthusiasm about AIX.)
Feel free to prove me wrong, but it's going to be a uphill climb.
