Thread: Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Not 7.5, but 8.0 ?
> -----Original Message----- > From: ow [mailto:oneway_111@yahoo.com] > Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2003 8:39 AM > To: Dann Corbit; Christopher Kings-Lynne; Greg Stark > Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org > Subject: RE: [HACKERS] [pgsql-advocacy] Not 7.5, but 8.0 ? > > > --- Dann Corbit <DCorbit@connx.com> wrote: > > Which feature is requested more than that? > > Not sure how often features are requested and by whom. > However, if you take a look at the TODO list, you'll find > plenty of stuff more important than win32 port. > > > Of the following (which includes every significant DBMS in terms of > > market share), which did not consider a native Windows port to be > > important: > > SQL*Sever (all right, we can discount this one...) > > DB/2 > > Oracle > > MySQL > > Sybase > > Informix > > Have *never* seen ppl running Oracle or Sybase on Windows. > Not sure about DB/2 or Informix, never worked with them, but > I'd suspect the picture is the same. They may claim that they > have win port but it's more of a marketing gimmick than a > useful feature that affects real, not hypothetical, users. I have all of the above database systems installed on the Windows 2000 machine I am typing this message from. DB/2 7.1 Oracle 8.1.7 and 9.2.0.5 MySQL 4.0.12 Sybase Adaptive Server 12.0 Informix Dynamic Server 9.2 (Also SapDB, Firebird server, SQL*Server, and several others that are not running right now) I just use them for development on this machine, but we have literally thousands of customers with those database systems installed on Win32 and used in production. > IMHO, core PostgreSQL development should not be sacrificed > for the sake of win32 port. A typical window-phobic. Thankfully, cooler heads will prevail.
--- Dann Corbit <DCorbit@connx.com> wrote: > I have all of the above database systems installed on the Windows 2000 > machine I am typing this message from. > DB/2 7.1 > Oracle 8.1.7 and 9.2.0.5 > MySQL 4.0.12 > Sybase Adaptive Server 12.0 > Informix Dynamic Server 9.2 > (Also SapDB, Firebird server, SQL*Server, and several others that are > not running right now) I'd say your environment is somewhat unique. > A typical window-phobic. Not really. I simply think there are more pressing issues than win32 port. Peace __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree
Le Mardi 18 Novembre 2003 20:22, ow a écrit : > Not really. I simply think there are more pressing issues than win32 port. Dear friends, Porting to Win32 can multiply: - direct users (i.e. developers) by a factor of two or three, - indirect users by a larger factor, provided that major projects include PostgreSQL in their offer. PostgreSQL is a potential candidate for integration in OpenOffice, PHP bundles and several other projects. This is not the case of Firebird or MySQL which are not mature enough and do not cover all needs like PostgreSQL does. PostgreSQL Win32 users can account in millions of people, not hundred thousands like today. OK, now, some of us will complain that Win32 is not needed at a time when the Debian Synaptic graphical installer gives access to 13.748 packages. Win32 sounds like an "old Atari game station". Agreed. On the long-run, everyone will leave Win32, even my grand-mother. But, on the converse, porting PostgreSQL to Windows "today" should be considered with care, because Win32 is the last "component" needed to reach a portfolio effect. [or to make a comparision in the "Risk" strategy game, when you have all countries in a continent, you win the continent]. Presently, PostgreSQL can be viewed as a large range of products and solutions. But this "range" only needs the Win32 port to become a complete portfolio. A portfolio effect is reached when you always answer questions with "Yes" or "All". Do you do this or do that? Answer A: yes, we do them All. Answer B: yes, we do them All. Answer C: yes, we do them All. = portfolio effect ... You wake-up and suddenly PostgreSQL becomes the next Office-suite in the domain of databases. This attracks more developers and everyone is happy with business. Cheers, Jean-Michel
Jean-Michel POURE wrote: > OK, now, some of us will complain that Win32 is not needed at a time when the > Debian Synaptic graphical installer gives access to 13.748 packages. Win32 > sounds like an "old Atari game station". Agreed. On the long-run, everyone > will leave Win32, even my grand-mother. Well, jokes and rants aside, win32 port is on high priority. The whole debate started on advocacy was 'Whether win32 port is killer-enough feature?' and not 'Whether win32 port is required now?' Win32 will happen. and we will revisit this debate when there is another release with win32..:-) Shridhar