From: | "Dave Page" <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk> |
---|---|
To: | "Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>, <shridhar_daithankar(at)persistent(dot)co(dot)in>, <Pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Cc: | <Pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: PGXLOG variable worthwhile? |
Date: | 2002-09-17 08:52:51 |
Message-ID: | 03AF4E498C591348A42FC93DEA9661B8681F@mail.vale-housing.co.uk |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Christopher Kings-Lynne [mailto:chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au]
> Sent: 17 September 2002 09:49
> To: shridhar_daithankar(at)persistent(dot)co(dot)in; Pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
> Cc: Pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] PGXLOG variable worthwhile?
>
>
> Users HAVE provided their feedback - they want Postgres on
> Windows. What's the point of open source if we can't
> accomodate them? There's no problems with economics,
> marketing, schedules, deadlines, nothing. The reason that
> people like Open Source is because they don't have to deal
> with some monolithic company refusing to port to their
> platform just because it's "too hard".
Which in this case is what puzzles me. We are only talking about a
simple GUC variable after all - I don't know for sure, but I'm guessing
it's not a huge effort to add one?
Regards, Dave.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Thomas Beutin | 2002-09-17 09:01:49 | Re: mod_auth_pgsql |
Previous Message | Christopher Kings-Lynne | 2002-09-17 08:49:22 | Re: [HACKERS] PGXLOG variable worthwhile? |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD | 2002-09-17 09:00:07 | Re: Proposal for resolving casting issues |
Previous Message | Christopher Kings-Lynne | 2002-09-17 08:49:22 | Re: [HACKERS] PGXLOG variable worthwhile? |