Re: [HACKERS] Inprise/Borland releasing Interbase as Open source - Mailing list pgsql-hackers
From | The Hermit Hacker |
---|---|
Subject | Re: [HACKERS] Inprise/Borland releasing Interbase as Open source |
Date | |
Msg-id | Pine.BSF.4.21.0001040915250.18498-100000@thelab.hub.org Whole thread Raw |
In response to | Re: [HACKERS] Inprise/Borland releasing Interbase as Open source (Jan Wieck <jwieck@debis.com>) |
Responses |
Re: [HACKERS] Inprise/Borland releasing Interbase as Open source
|
List | pgsql-hackers |
I've since gotten an email from Stephen in response to his comments, and I think that when he wrote his original, he needed his morning cup of coffee (or equivalent), since it came over alot heavier then what he email'd me... A quick summary: They didn't report the memory leaks...they fixed them and uploaded patches, which have been accepted and commit'd A few problems couldn't be reproduced, and, therefore, left unreported. I wish ppl would report anyway, as someone else might be coming across this, finding it also non-reproducable and might have some data to add :( The only one that is left outstanding right now has to do with: "However, the biggest problem was reported recently, see "HEAP_MOVED_IN during vacuum" posted on Saturday, no replies" ... Anyone have any comments on that last one? On Tue, 4 Jan 2000, Jan Wieck wrote: > The Hermit Hacker wrote: > > > On Mon, 3 Jan 2000, Stephen Birch wrote: > > > > > I wish this announcement had been made a few months ago!! We have > > > several developers porting our server software to PostgreSQL. > > > Although we like PostgreSQL, we have run into a number of memory leaks > > > and bugs - something we never encountered with Interbase. > > > > What version of PostgreSQL? Did the problem reports you sent in not > > improve the situation? > > I haven't seen that many. And what kind of a project leader must it be, > that a simple announcement causes the work of several programmers over > months (sounds at least like a man-year) to be thrown away? IMHO the > kind of PL, companies like M$ are targeting with their huge amount of > announcements. > > > > > Now Interbase is going open source, we will discontinue the PostgreSQL > > > development effort. Interbase is such a well written DBMS, it doesn't > > > make sense to continue. > > > > Two points...when will Interbase go open source? Right now they've > > announced the intention to do so, and even given a very brood time > > frame...but, when is it going to happen. two...what says Interbase will > > continue to be "as good" when becomes open source and they are no longer > > making any money on it? > > Since it's the toplevel story on www.borland.com, I think it'll really > happen soon. And I also think they intend to continue making money on > it, just not by selling DB-licenses any more. They have a rich set of > development tools etc. they can sell anyway. And in many projects I've > seen that it's never a bad choice not to mixup too many > hardware/software vendors (they'll all point to each other as soon as > problems arise). So it's a big PRO for their applications and tools, if > you'll get the DB they use for free. And it's your decision to spend > money when going into production to buy commercial support (what I > expect they'll offer). > > Another point is this. As long as I know Postgres, a couple of features > had been added just because some user needed it. And they are supported > and kept alive. Do they have some proposal on that? How will they deal > with some feature-patch sent in? > > > Jan > > -- > > #======================================================================# > # It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. # > # Let's break this rule - forgive me. # > #========================================= wieck@debis.com (Jan Wieck) # > > > Marc G. Fournier ICQ#7615664 IRC Nick: Scrappy Systems Administrator @ hub.org primary: scrappy@hub.org secondary: scrappy@{freebsd|postgresql}.org
pgsql-hackers by date: