> -----Original Message----- > From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2003 12:30 PM > To: Lamar Owen > Cc: Dave Page; Vince Vielhaber; Ron Mayer; > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [mail] Re: [HACKERS] Windows Build System > > > Lamar Owen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > While I understand (and agree with) your (and Vince's) reasoning on > > why > > Windows should be considered less reliable, neither of you > have provided a > > sound technical basis for why we should not hold the other > ports to the same > > standards. > > The point here is that Windows is virgin territory for us. > We know about Unix. When we port to a new Unix variant, we > are dealing with the same system APIs, and in many cases > large chunks of the same system code, that we've dealt with > before. It's reasonable for us to have confidence that > Postgres will work the same on such a platform as it does on > other Unix variants. And the track record of reliability > that we have built up across a bunch of Unix variants gives > us cross-pollinating confidence in all of them. > > Windows shares none of that heritage. It is the first truly > new port, onto a system without any Unix background, that we > have ever done AFAIK. Claiming that it doesn't require an > increased level of testing is somewhere between ridiculous > and irresponsible. > > > I believe we should test every release as pathologically as Vince > > has stated for Win32. > > Great, go to it. That does not alter the fact that today, > with our existing port history, Windows has to be treated > with extra suspicion. > > I do not buy the argument you are making that we should treat > all platforms alike. If we had a ten-year-old Windows port, > we could consider it as stable as all our other ten-year-old > Unix ports. We don't. Given that we don't have infinite > resources for testing, it's simple rationality to put more > testing emphasis on the places that we suspect there will be > problems. And if you don't suspect there will be problems on > Windows, you are being way too naive :-( > > > Do we want to encourage Win32? (some obviously do, but I > don't) Well, > > telling > > people that we have tested PostgreSQL on Win32 much more > thoroughly than on > > Unix is in a way telling them that we think it is _better_ than the > > time-tested Unix ports ('It passed a harder test on Win32. > Are we afraid the > > Unix ports won't pass those same tests?'). > > If it passes the tests, good for it. I honestly do not > expect that it will. My take on this is that we want to be > able to document the problems in advance, rather than be blindsided.
Our port of 7.1.3 passed every test, including the dynamic loading. I don't expect the Win32 port to be problematic. ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
