Thread: Is the Windows Version Stable?
I have a client who is wanting to use NT for an OS for a Web/Database server - They don't want to pay for MSSQL and MySQL won't cut it (I need Triggers, etc). Is installing Cygwin + PostgreSQL on NT a stable solution? Is FreeBSD/Linux going to be more stable? Thanks, Joe
Joe Koenig <joe@jwebmedia.com> writes:
> Is installing Cygwin + PostgreSQL on NT a stable
> solution? Is FreeBSD/Linux going to be more stable?
People are using PG on Cygwin, but I wouldn't recommend it as a highly
reliable setup. If you can possibly talk them into a real Unix setup
(Linux, BSD, whatever), do so.
regards, tom lane
Hello, Joe Koenig! On Fri, Dec 21, 2001 at 10:49:55AM -0600, you wrote: > I have a client who is wanting to use NT for an OS for a Web/Database > server - They don't want to pay for MSSQL and MySQL won't cut it (I need > Triggers, etc). Is installing Cygwin + PostgreSQL on NT a stable > solution? Is FreeBSD/Linux going to be more stable? Thanks, I suppose cygwin+PostgreSQL is experimental thing and if your client will use his server for production and mission critical purposes it would be better to use FreeBSD and/or Linux. -- NEVE-RIPE
"SHELTON,MICHAEL (Non-HP-Boise,ex1)" <michael_shelton@non.hp.com> writes:
> Why do you not recommend it as a reliable setup?
Mainly because cygwin is still a work in progress; and by all reports
NT is a less stable/secure platform than Unixen, even without the
additional stability risks from adding the cygwin layer.
If it works for you, great. But I'd not want to see my payroll data
kept in it ;-)
regards, tom lane
Why do you not recommend it as a reliable setup? Not enough case studies
(e.g. companies with a successful history of PG on Cygwin)? Problems with
NT? Not enough testing on NT/Cygwin? Problems with Cygwin?
I'm using it on NT (win2k specifically) for my database and have been
pleased with it and if there is concrete data to support not having it on NT
I'd like to know so I can consider the need to switch.
Thanks,
Mike Shelton
-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us]
Sent: Friday, December 21, 2001 12:03 PM
To: joe@jwebmedia.com
Cc: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Is the Windows Version Stable?
Joe Koenig <joe@jwebmedia.com> writes:
> Is installing Cygwin + PostgreSQL on NT a stable
> solution? Is FreeBSD/Linux going to be more stable?
People are using PG on Cygwin, but I wouldn't recommend it as a highly
reliable setup. If you can possibly talk them into a real Unix setup
(Linux, BSD, whatever), do so.
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html
"SHELTON,MICHAEL (Non-HP-Boise,ex1)" <michael_shelton@non.hp.com> writes:
> PS As a side note would you want your payroll data on a PostgreSQL
> database?
I think I'd trust 7.2 for it. Not sure about any earlier release;
we've only now gotten to the point of being credible for
mission-critical apps, IMHO.
regards, tom lane
Ahh...good point. I certainly wouldn't either. This is for an integration
tool in our development environment. More along the lines of "handy" than
"critical".
Thanks,
Mike
PS As a side note would you want your payroll data on a PostgreSQL
database?
-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us]
Sent: Friday, December 21, 2001 12:20 PM
To: SHELTON,MICHAEL (Non-HP-Boise,ex1)
Cc: joe@jwebmedia.com; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Is the Windows Version Stable?
"SHELTON,MICHAEL (Non-HP-Boise,ex1)" <michael_shelton@non.hp.com> writes:
> Why do you not recommend it as a reliable setup?
Mainly because cygwin is still a work in progress; and by all reports
NT is a less stable/secure platform than Unixen, even without the
additional stability risks from adding the cygwin layer.
If it works for you, great. But I'd not want to see my payroll data
kept in it ;-)
regards, tom lane