Tope Akinniyi wrote:
Hi all,
In my country Nigeria (and even African continent), we do not eat what
the western world eat. We wear different styles of cloths. In the same
vein, our computerisation culture is different.
Having lived in Indonesia, I can sympathize with your situation. It is
Tope Akinniyi wrote:
Hi,
I am wondering at this display of extreme Linux mentality being
displayed by the 'top bras' of the PostgreSQL community. And I ask,
are we encouraging Windows use of PostgreSQL at all?
At the moment? There are some known issues... Bear in mind that the
Windows port
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...it will be the first time they have seen your name... ...with your first
email have criticised the project...
Check the archives. This poster has been active on the list for awhile.
He has indeed, and even posted a news item, but it will still be the
first time many
* Jim C. Nasby [EMAIL PROTECTED] [0336 21:36]:
With the attitude of Windows can not be made to reliably run a
database, how many developers do you think will be attracted?
People are entitled to an opinion, and in many cases its formed from
experience. I think it's unrealistic to expect a
Richard Huxton wrote:
It can also be bad - the more time spent supporting Windows, the less
time is spent working on PostgreSQL itself.
Unless the Windows support attracts more resources. Personally I'd be
surprised if that's not the case.
That's clearly a decision only you can make. Getting
That remains to be seen.
I wouldn't consider it the least bit worthwhile to try to evaluate it
now, as what is happening now is that WinFolk are getting their very
first exposure to the software.
It would seem surprising for new developers to emerge from the
Windows(tm) population before at
Quoth [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim C. Nasby):
With the attitude of Windows can not be made to reliably run a
database, how many developers do you think will be attracted?
That remains to be seen.
I wouldn't consider it the least bit worthwhile to try to evaluate it
now, as what is happening now is
@postgresql.org
hes.com.au cc:
Sent by:Subject: Re: [GENERAL]
PostgreSQL still
Richard Huxton wrote:
2. This response is alarming: Tom Lane wrote in digest V1.5092:
We are supporting Windows as a Postgres platform for the benefit of
developers who want to do testing on their laptops (and for reasons
best known to themselves feel a need to run Windows on their
An idea I like, because I have entrenched windows clients
also, is to run things that run best under Linux on VMWare
(vmware.com) and to run good Windows things (like desktop
apps) under Windows. Linux can be either the host or guest
OS under VMWare, so the options of which OS is truly
Le vendredi 11 mars 2005 à 10:10 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] a
écrit :
An idea I like, because I have entrenched windows clients also, is to run
things that run best under Linux on VMWare (vmware.com) and to run good
Windows things (like desktop apps) under Windows. Linux can be either the
host
Le vendredi 11 mars 2005 à 16:51 +0100, Magnus Hagander a écrit :
Do *not* do this with a production database.
Vmware does *not* correctly handle fsync()s (or O_SYNC or any of those)
thruogh to disk. If your host PC crashes, your database will almost
certainly be corrupted. fsync() on the
Do *not* do this with a production database.
Vmware does *not* correctly handle fsync()s (or O_SYNC or any of
those) thruogh to disk. If your host PC crashes, your database will
almost certainly be corrupted. fsync() on the client just
puts it in
the RAM cache on the host. Not
Le vendredi 11 mars 2005 à 17:41 +0100, Magnus Hagander a écrit :
Do *not* do this with a production database.
Vmware does *not* correctly handle fsync()s (or O_SYNC or any of
those) thruogh to disk. If your host PC crashes, your database will
almost certainly be corrupted.
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Nobody should ever put a server regardless of OS on a public IP.
It should always be firewalled/Nat/Port Forwarding.
Except for the firewall/Nat server, of course :D
--
Alban Hertroys
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: if
While we run PostgreSQL on Free-BSD for our production systems, we have
'demo' laptop windows XP systems that contain the entire server
architecture (application server, database, win32 client, etc). Sure is
handy to be able to run PostgreSQL on windows and not have to change
anything..
Hi all,
In my country Nigeria (and even African continent), we do not eat what the western world eat. We wear different styles of cloths. In the same vein, our computerisation culture is different.
I must submit that computers became popular in Nigeria by Windows desktop system. While the
On Thu, 2005-03-10 at 10:19, Tope Akinniyi wrote:
Hi all,
Howdy. Glad to have you on the lists.
1. If I can manage it, can I continue to use PostgreSQL on Windows and
watch as it evolves? I recognise the points certain respondents made
on earlier; which was PostgreSQL on Windows is still a
Tope,
As someone who's been on these lists for several years now, I can honestly
say they're among the friendliest and most helpful I've found.
i can certainly echo that sentiment. from what i can tell, Tom in particular
(since he's been 'called out' here) has (most of the time ...) the patience
]
Sent by: cc:
pgsql-general@postgresql.org
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: [GENERAL]
PostgreSQL still for Linux only
On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 11:39:53AM -0600, Doug Hall wrote:
On Wed, 9 Mar 2005 11:02:10 -0600, Jim C. Nasby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
... but the fact is there's still a LOT of places
that are windows shops and a LOT of people who use windows more heavily
than *nix. More important, the egotism
On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 09:47:17AM -0800, Ben wrote:
Ho ho, flame on! :)
My completely annecodal experience with devs which prefer windows over
posix is that the former prods things until they seem to work and accepts
unexplained behavior far more readily than the latter. Do I *really* want
On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 05:51:43PM -0800, Chris Travers wrote:
Jim C. Nasby wrote:
Ok--- I will admit to a anti-Windows bias. But at least my bias is
informed. In addition to my former employment at Microsoft, I have
studies both types of OS's in detail. Here are some specific comments
On Thu, Mar 10, 2005 at 11:22:59AM -0600, Scott Marlowe wrote:
2. This response is alarming:
Tom Lane wrote in digest V1.5092:
We are supporting Windows as a Postgres platform for the benefit of
developers who want to
do testing on their laptops (and for reasons best known to themselves
On Thu, 2005-03-10 at 16:19 +, Tope Akinniyi wrote:
Hi all,
--- cut ---
I sought Windows replication tool for and could not get. I checked
PgFoundry and the one there put a banner and said NOT FOR WINDOWS.
Then I said is this PostgreSQL for Windows a joke? That prompted
my post -
On Thu, 2005-03-10 at 15:45, Jim C. Nasby wrote:
On Thu, Mar 10, 2005 at 11:22:59AM -0600, Scott Marlowe wrote:
2. This response is alarming:
Tom Lane wrote in digest V1.5092:
We are supporting Windows as a Postgres platform for the benefit of
developers who want to
do testing on
From: Tope Akinniyi
snip
experiences. As an IT organisation that wants to stay in business you need to
give to people what they wants. I think that is
the basis of service. I have some deployments of PostgreSQL on Windows servers.
I must admit that we have not had any problems so
far.
/snip
Jim C. Nasby wrote:
On Thu, Mar 10, 2005 at 11:22:59AM -0600, Scott Marlowe wrote:
This is the second problem. Windows simply has problems that cause data
relibility problems that may or may not be surmountable in the future.
Do you have any references to these problems? I've seen several
:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: [GENERAL]
PostgreSQL still for Linux only?
tgresql.org
On Tue, 2005-03-08 at 21:24, Tope Akinniyi wrote:
Hi,
I am wondering at this display of extreme Linux mentality being
displayed by the 'top bras' of the PostgreSQL community. And I ask,
are we encouraging Windows use of PostgreSQL at all?
Take a look at tools being rolled out at
Tom Lane wrote:
Tope Akinniyi [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I am not holding anybody responsible, but I think we need to do a massive re-orientation of the community not to carry the Linux-Windows game too far.
This is a troll, isn't it?
My thinking as well, unfortunately, has hooked some folks...
--
--- Uwe C. Schroeder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The problem is, that it's a question of
perception. Most windows fans don't
see that their OS is pretty instable.
That may have been true in 1995. However, in this day
and age most Windows fans don't see that their OS as
unstable because it
Personally, I find the anti-windows bias that has been shown in this
thread by some developers to be disappointing. Maybe it sucks to program
in, and maybe it's not as stable as unix (though I don't put much water
in that argument anymore), but the fact is there's still a LOT of places
that are
Shelby Cain wrote:
--- Uwe C. Schroeder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The problem is, that it's a question of
perception. Most windows fans don't
see that their OS is pretty instable.
That may have been true in 1995. However, in this day
and age most Windows fans don't see that
On Wed, 9 Mar 2005 11:02:10 -0600, Jim C. Nasby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
... but the fact is there's still a LOT of places
that are windows shops and a LOT of people who use windows more heavily
than *nix. More important, the egotism of If you want to use PostgreSQL
you better run it on what we
Ho ho, flame on! :)
My completely annecodal experience with devs which prefer windows over
posix is that the former prods things until they seem to work and accepts
unexplained behavior far more readily than the latter. Do I *really* want
that kind of mentality in my database devs?
Anyway, I
:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: [GENERAL]
PostgreSQL still for Linux only?
tgresql.org
Le mercredi 09 mars 2005 à 09:47 -0800, Ben a écrit :
Ho ho, flame on! :)
Hear hear!!! This man is a troll if ever we have seen one.
Personally, I find the anti-windows bias that has been shown in this
thread by some developers to be disappointing. Maybe it sucks to program
in, and maybe
I thank you all for throwing light on the question I
asked.
I was exchanging mails with one of the developers on
PgFoundry. He made a comment and said
'Is anybody using PostgreSQL on Windows?'.
I began to wonder, was the Windows version a toy?
I head a software development outfit in Nigeria
On Wed, 9 Mar 2005, tony wrote:
Le mercredi 09 mars 2005 à 09:47 -0800, Ben a écrit :
Ho ho, flame on! :)
Hear hear!!! This man is a troll if ever we have seen one.
Who? Jim Nasby? He's made several helpful posts to this list in my
memory, and I'm sure an archive search would turn up a
tony wrote:
Excuse me dear sir. There seems to be about 97% of the world that runs
Windows that does not give you permission to be rude to a tiny minority
who just happen to have written an insanely great database that runs
quite nicely on their hobby OSs as well as the crap you call home. If
you
Joshua,
Very well put !
Cheers,
Aly.
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Shelby Cain wrote:
--- Uwe C. Schroeder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The problem is, that it's a question of
perception. Most windows fans don't
see that their OS is pretty instable.
That may have
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tope Akinniyi) writes:
I am wondering at this display of extreme Linux mentality being
displayed by the 'top bras' of the PostgreSQL community. And I ask,
are we encouraging Windows use of PostgreSQL at all?
Take a look at tools being rolled out at PgFoundry on daily
I thank you all for throwing light on the question I asked.
[missed it earlier, not been reading that lists mail]
I was exchanging mails with one of the developers on
PgFoundry. He made a comment and said
'Is anybody using PostgreSQL on Windows?'.
Yes. I know of several fairly large
The only additional thing I would add to this if it hasn't been mentioned
already is that 2000 had/has some major security issues and even though 2003 is
more secure out of the box from what I've experienced so far, I would **never**
trust a windows box to anything other than my LAN using private
Quoting Joshua D. Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Shelby Cain wrote:
--- Uwe C. Schroeder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The problem is, that it's a question of
perception. Most windows fans don't
see that their OS is pretty instable.
That may have been true in
Quoting Joshua D. Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
The only additional thing I would add to this if it hasn't been mentioned
already is that 2000 had/has some major security issues and even though 2003
is
more secure out of the box from what I've experienced so far, I would
**never**
trust a
The beauty of an open source, BSD-licensed project like PostgreSQL is
the entire Who cares? possibility list.
If you have a Windows shop and you have Windows trained personnel, then
you can use PostgreSQL.
If you have a Linux shop and Linux trained personnel, then you can use
PostgreSQL.
If you
Jim C. Nasby wrote:
Personally, I find the anti-windows bias that has been shown in this
thread by some developers to be disappointing. Maybe it sucks to program
in, and maybe it's not as stable as unix (though I don't put much water
in that argument anymore), but the fact is there's still a LOT
Hi,
I am wondering at this display of extreme Linux mentality being displayed by the 'top bras' of the PostgreSQL community. And I ask, are we encouraging Windows use of PostgreSQL at all?
Take a look at tools being rolled out at PgFoundry on daily basis; all for Linux except the Windows
Tope Akinniyi wrote:
Hi,
I am wondering at this display of extreme Linux mentality being
displayed by the 'top bras' of the PostgreSQL community. And I ask,
are we encouraging Windows use of PostgreSQL at all?
I believe that there is a lot of encouragement of the use of PostgreSQL
on
On Wed, 2005-03-09 at 03:24 +, Tope Akinniyi wrote:
Hi,
I am wondering at this display of extreme Linux mentality being
displayed by the 'top bras' of the PostgreSQL community. And I ask,
are we encouraging Windows use of PostgreSQL at all?
Take a look at tools being rolled out at
On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 03:24:05AM +, Tope Akinniyi wrote:
I am wondering at this display of extreme Linux mentality being
displayed by the 'top bras' of the PostgreSQL community. And I
ask, are we encouraging Windows use of PostgreSQL at all?
I don't see the extreme Linux mentality you
Tope Akinniyi [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I am not holding anybody responsible, but I think we need to do a massive
re-orientation of the community not to carry the Linux-Windows game too far.
This is a troll, isn't it?
regards, tom lane
---(end
Tom Lane wrote:
Tope Akinniyi [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I am not holding anybody responsible, but I think we need to do a massive re-orientation of the community not to carry the Linux-Windows game too far.
This is a troll, isn't it?
I don't know, the email was fairly thought out. I
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tuesday 08 March 2005 07:24 pm, Tope Akinniyi wrote:
Hi,
I am wondering at this display of extreme Linux mentality being displayed
by the 'top bras' of the PostgreSQL community. And I ask, are we
encouraging Windows use of PostgreSQL at all?
Title: RE: [GENERAL] PostgreSQL still for Linux only?
I don't want to split hairs, but wasn't Firebird originally Interbase? If so, you'll find it was originally a *nix product before it was a Windows database (back in the Ashton-Tate days for those with long memories).
Edwin New
Tom Lane wrote:
Tope Akinniyi [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I am not holding anybody responsible, but I think we need to do a
massive re-orientation of the community not to carry the
Linux-Windows game too far.
This is a troll, isn't it?
Perhaps it's a 419 :-). But if so I can't see the catch yet -
On Tuesday 08 March 2005 07:24 pm, Tope Akinniyi wrote:
Hi,
I am wondering at this display of extreme Linux mentality being displayed
by the 'top bras' of the PostgreSQL community. And I ask, are we
encouraging Windows use of PostgreSQL at all?
Take a look at tools being rolled out
Hi folks
Tell me one thing... what is cygwin + postgresql then?
I find it cool with Windows.
And why Linux only? I successfully deployed it in
various other platforms including AIX and IRIX.(Thanks
to postgresql community.
I think loading and running Oracle in Windows (or any
other platform)
Tim Allen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom Lane wrote:
This is a troll, isn't it?
Perhaps it's a 419 :-). But if so I can't see the catch yet - must be
very subtle.
Nothing very subtle about it. In the first place, I'm not going to
waste my breath debating anyone who thinks Linux == every
. Schroeder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, 9 March 2005 3:49 PM
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] PostgreSQL still for Linux only?
On Tuesday 08 March 2005 07:24 pm, Tope Akinniyi wrote:
Hi,
I am wondering at this display of extreme Linux mentality being displayed
Uwe C. Schroeder wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tuesday 08 March 2005 07:24 pm, Tope Akinniyi wrote:
Hi,
I am wondering at this display of extreme Linux mentality being displayed
by the 'top bras' of the PostgreSQL community. And I ask, are we
encouraging Windows use of
On Wed, 9 Mar 2005 16:02:46 +1100, Edwin New [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't want to split hairs, but wasn't Firebird originally Interbase? If
so, you'll find it was originally a *nix product before it was a Windows
database (back in the Ashton-Tate days for those with long memories).
Le mardi 08 mars 2005 à 22:17 -0800, J. Greenlees a écrit :
I am wondering at this display of extreme Linux mentality being displayed
by the 'top bras' of the PostgreSQL community. And I ask, are we
encouraging Windows use of PostgreSQL at all?
I run my development server on Mac OS X.
If a
65 matches
Mail list logo
