Don Baccus writes:
How long until the entire code base gets co-opted?
Yeah so what? Nobody's forcing you to use, buy, or pay attention to any
such efforts. The market will determine whether the release model of
PostgreSQL, Inc. appeals to customers. Open source software is a
privilege, and
Ron Chmara wrote:
As it is, any company trying to make a closed version of an open source
product has some _massive_ work to do. Manuals. Documentation. Sales.
Branding. Phone support lines. Legal departments/Lawsuit prevention. Figuring
out how to prevent open source from stealing the
Branding. Phone support lines. Legal departments/Lawsuit prevention.
Figuring
out how to prevent open source from stealing the thunder by duplicating
^^
features. And building a _product_.
Oops. You didn't really mean that, did
How long until the entire code base gets co-opted?
Yeah so what? Nobody's forcing you to use, buy, or pay attention to any
such efforts. The market will determine whether the release model of
PostgreSQL, Inc. appeals to customers. Open source software is a
privilege, and nobody has the
I've applied Neale Ferguson's patches for S/390 support, and some fairly
extensive patches to repair and improve support for the OVERLAPS
operator. I've increased coverage of this in the regression tests,
including horology, so those platforms which have variants on these test
results will need
Thomas Lockhart wrote:
As soon as you find a business model which does not require income, let
me know. The .com'ers are trying it at the moment, and there seems to be
a few flaws... ;)
While I have not contributed anything to Postgres yet, I have
contributed to other environments. The
At 11:00 PM 12/2/00 -0800, Vadim Mikheev wrote:
There is risk here. It isn't so much in the fact that PostgreSQL, Inc
is doing a couple of modest closed-source things with the code. After
all, the PG community has long acknowleged that the BSD license would
allow others to co-op the code
Hi,
I would very much like some way of writing binary data to a database.
Copy binary recently broke on me after upgrading to 7.0. I have large
simulation codes and writing lots of floats to the database by
converting them to text first is 1) a real pain, 2) slow and 3) can lead
to
Adriaan Joubert [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Copy binary recently broke on me after upgrading to 7.0.
I think you're talking about binary copy via the frontend, which has a
different set of problems. To fix that, we need to make some protocol
changes, which would (preferably) also apply to
I totaly missed your point here. How closing source of ERserver is related
to closing code of PostgreSQL DB server? Let me clear things:
(not based on WAL)
That's wasn't clear from the blurb.
Still, this notion that PG, Inc will start producing closed-source products
poisons the well.
I think this trend is MUCH bigger than what Postgres, Inc. is doing... its
happening all over
the comminity. Heck take a look around... Jabber, Postgres, Red Hat, SuSe,
Storm etc. etc.
these companies are making good money off a business plan that was basically
"hey, lets take some
of that open
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
mlw writes:
There are hundreds (thousands?) of people that have contributed to the
development of Postgres, either directly with code, or beta testing,
with the assumption that they are benefiting a community. Many would
probably not have done so if they had
On Sat, 2 Dec 2000, Adam Haberlach wrote:
In any case, can we create pgsql-politics so we don't have to go over
this issue every three months? Can we create pgsql-benchmarks while we
are at it, to take care of the other thread that keeps popping up?
no skin off my back:
On Sat, 2 Dec 2000, Don Baccus wrote:
I *am* one of those volunteers
Yes, I well remember you screwing up PG 7.0 just before beta, without bothering
to test your code, and leaving on vacation.
You were irresponsible then, and you're being irresponsible now.
Okay, so let me get this
Don Baccus wrote:
At 04:42 AM 12/3/00 +, Thomas Lockhart wrote:
This statement of yours kinda belittles the work done over the past
few years by volunteers.
imho it does not,
Sure it does. You in essence are saying that "advanced replication is so
hard that it could only come
mlw wrote:
Thomas Lockhart wrote:
As soon as you find a business model which does not require income, let
me know. The .com'ers are trying it at the moment, and there seems to be
a few flaws... ;)
While I have not contributed anything to Postgres yet, I have
contributed to other
The Hermit Hacker wrote:
On Sat, 2 Dec 2000, Don Baccus wrote:
I *am* one of those volunteers
Yes, I well remember you screwing up PG 7.0 just before beta, without bothering
to test your code, and leaving on vacation.
You were irresponsible then, and you're being irresponsible
Hannu Krosing wrote:
I know this is a borderline rant, and I am sorry, but I think it is very
important that the integrity of open source be preserved at 100% because
it is a very slippery slope, and we are all surrounded by the temptation
cheat the spirit of open source "just a little"
(I posted this yesterday, but it never appeared. Apologies if it's a
duplicate to you.)
I've written ( submitted to pgsql-docs) a tutorial on using RI
features
and on alter the system catalog to change RI properties for existing
relationships.
I needs polishing, etc., but, mostly it needs
"Gary MacDougall" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
No offense Trond, if you were in on the Red Hat IPO from the start,
you'd have to say those people made "good money".
I'm talking about the business as such, not the IPO where the price
went stratospheric (we were priced like we were earning 1 or 2
Oleg Bartunov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote a couple months ago:
It's clear that we must use 'unsigned char' instead of 'char'
and corrected version runs ok on both systems. That's why I suspect
that gcc 2.95.2 has different default under FreeBSD which could
cause problem with LC_CTYPE in 7.0.2
Gary MacDougall wrote:
No, not at all. At least for me, if I write code which is dependent on
the open source work of others, then hell yes, that work should also be
open source. That, to me, is the difference between right and wrong.
Actually, your not legally bound to anything if
No, not at all. At least for me, if I write code which is dependent on
the open source work of others, then hell yes, that work should also be
open source. That, to me, is the difference between right and wrong.
Actually, your not legally bound to anything if you write "new" additional
code,
On Sun, Dec 03, 2000 at 05:17:36PM -0500, mlw wrote:
... if I write code which is dependent on
the open source work of others, then hell yes, that work should also be
open source. That, to me, is the difference between right and wrong.
This is short and I will say no more:
The entire social
Adam Haberlach wrote:
In any case, can we create pgsql-politics so we don't have to go over
this issue every three months? Can we create pgsql-benchmarks while we
are at it, to take care of the other thread that keeps popping up?
pgsql-yawn, where any of them can happen as often and
mlw wrote: [heavily edited]
No, not at all. At least for me, if I write code which is dependent on
the open source work of others, then hell yes, that work should also be
open source. That, to me, is the difference between right and wrong.
I honestly feel that it is wrong to take what
At 5:17 PM -0500 12/3/00, mlw wrote:
I honestly feel that it is wrong to take what others have shared and use
it for the basis of something you will not share, and I can't understand
how anyone could think differently.
Yeah, it really sucks when companies that are in buisness to make money by
On Sun, 3 Dec 2000, Hannu Krosing wrote:
The Hermit Hacker wrote:
On Sat, 2 Dec 2000, Don Baccus wrote:
I *am* one of those volunteers
Yes, I well remember you screwing up PG 7.0 just before beta, without bothering
to test your code, and leaving on vacation.
You were
On Sun, 3 Dec 2000, mlw wrote:
Hannu Krosing wrote:
I know this is a borderline rant, and I am sorry, but I think it is very
important that the integrity of open source be preserved at 100% because
it is a very slippery slope, and we are all surrounded by the temptation
cheat the
On Sun, 3 Dec 2000, Gary MacDougall wrote:
If you write a program which stands on its own, takes no work from
uncompensated parties, then you have the unambiguous right to do what
ever you want.
Thats a given.
okay, then now I'm confused ... neither SePICK or erServer are derived
from
On Sun, Dec 03, 2000 at 08:49:09PM -0400, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
On Sun, 3 Dec 2000, Hannu Krosing wrote:
IIRC, this thread woke up on someone complaining about PostgreSQl inc
promising
to release some code for replication in mid-october and asking for
confirmation
that this
I'm still anxious to see the core patches needed to support replication.
Since you've leaked that they work going back to v6.5, I have a feeling
the approach may not be the one I was hoping for.
There are no core patches required to support replication. This has been
said already, but perhaps
I'm agreeing with the people like SePICK and erServer.
I'm only being sort of cheeky in saying that they wouldn't have had a
product had
it not been for the Open Source that they are leveraging off of.
Making money? I don't know what they're plans are, but at some point I would
fully expect
Correct me if I'm wrong but in the last 3 years what company that you
know of didn't consider an IPO part of the "business and such". Most
tech companies that have been formed in the last 4 - 5 years have one
thing on the brain--IPO. It's the #1 thing (sadly) that they care about.
I only wished
On Sun, 3 Dec 2000, Ross J. Reedstrom wrote:
If this is the impression that someone gave, I am shocked ... Thomas
himself has already posted stating that it was a scheduale slip on his
part.
Actually, Thomas said:
Thomas Hmm. What has kept replication from happening in the past? It
On Sun, 3 Dec 2000, Gary MacDougall wrote:
I'm agreeing with the people like SePICK and erServer.
I'm only being sort of cheeky in saying that they wouldn't have had a
product had
it not been for the Open Source that they are leveraging off of.
So, basically, if I hadn't pulled together
On Sun, Dec 03, 2000 at 08:53:08PM -0400, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
On Sun, 3 Dec 2000, Gary MacDougall wrote:
If you write a program which stands on its own, takes no work from
uncompensated parties, then you have the unambiguous right to do what
ever you want.
Thats a given.
On Sun, 3 Dec 2000, Ross J. Reedstrom wrote:
On Sun, Dec 03, 2000 at 08:53:08PM -0400, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
On Sun, 3 Dec 2000, Gary MacDougall wrote:
If you write a program which stands on its own, takes no work from
uncompensated parties, then you have the unambiguous right
bingo.
Not just third-party app's, but think of all the vertical products that
include PG...
I'm right now wondering if TIVO uses it?
You have to think that PG will show up in some pretty interesting money
making products...
So yes, had you not got the ball rolling well, you know what I'm
Tom Lane wrote:
This is a header bug (there's a backend header file that some bright
soul put a static function declaration into :-( ... and the function
Actually, it's a static function, not a declaration. The DISABLE_COMPLEX_MACRO
definition was originally put in to work around a macro size
(apologies for posting directly to pgsql-hackers, but I'm asking for a
hacker to explicitly check on the accuracy of another posting!)
I've written ( submitted to pgsql-docs) a tutorial on using RI features
and on alter the system catalog to change RI properties for existing
relationships.
I
On Fri, Dec 01, 2000 at 12:00:12AM -0400, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
On Thu, 30 Nov 2000, Nathan Myers wrote:
On Thu, Nov 30, 2000 at 07:02:01PM -0400, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
v7.1 should improve crash recovery ...
... with the WAL stuff that Vadim is producing, you'll be able to
At 01:06 PM 12/3/00 +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Open source software is a
privilege,
I admit that I don't subscribe to Stallman's "source to software is a
right" argument. That's far off my reality map.
and nobody has the right to call someone "irresponsible"
because they want to get
Hello,
Before the Thanksgiving holiday here in the US I had been following with
great interest the thread regarding Vadim's English and the postgres docs.
Since this was posted about 200 messages ago, I replied as a new thread... I
hope you don't mind!
I am interested in volunteering some
Hi
I'm compiling (not, I'm trying to compile) last version of Postgresql on
Sequent Dynix/ptx ver 4.4.7 system. Under compilation process with gcc (ver
2.7.2 ported on dynix/pt) is reporting several errors.
If someone is ready to help me with this process please send me answer.
Radek
At 03:35 PM 11/30/00 -0800, Nathan Myers wrote:
On Thu, Nov 30, 2000 at 07:02:01PM -0400, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
v7.1 should improve crash recovery ...
... with the WAL stuff that Vadim is producing, you'll be able to
recover up until the point that the power cable was pulled out of
the
I have Red Hat Linux 6.2 , PostgreSQL 7.0.2.
Could anybody help me to configure ident daemon using the file
pg_ident.conf
Thanks in advance,
anuradha
The cost difference between 32K vs 8K disk reads/writes are so small
these days when compared with overall cost of the disk operation itself,
that you can even measure it, well below 1%. Remember seek times
advertised on disks are an average.
It has been said how small the difference is -
Hi,
I have two questions
1. Is it possible to set up a set of redundant disks for a database? one
of them being remote from
the database?
2. If I want to use my i/o routines for disk i/o, is it possible?
does postgres support such APIs?
thanks,
Sandeep
49 matches
Mail list logo
