On Wed, 29 Jan 2003, Dave Page wrote:

> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Vince Vielhaber [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: 29 January 2003 16:27
> > To: Katie Ward
> > Cc: Tom Lane; Curtis Faith; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: [mail] Re: [HACKERS] Windows Build System
> >
> >
> > The only assumption I see being made here is this:
> >
> > "I believe that the port, as submitted, can be used as an
> > industrial-strength solution."
> >
> > I see no evidence to support this claim.  If you have this
> > evidence, feel free to share it with the rest of us.
> I hammered the betas on a couple of test boxes running Windows XP and
> .NET Server of various (pre)releases and found it to be rock solid,
> performing comparably to my Linux based systems. The Cygwin version fell
> over quite quickly under the same tests.
> I'll admit my methods were not particularly scientific, but over the
> last few weeks I've had far more grief from DB2 and SQL Server than I
> did from the PostgreSQL native betas.

hammering the betas is a far cry from an "industrial-strength solution".

 Fast, inexpensive internet service 56k and beyond!  http://www.pop4.net/
   http://www.meanstreamradio.com       http://www.unknown-artists.com
         Internet radio: It's not file sharing, it's just radio.

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

Reply via email to