| From: | Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee> |
|---|---|
| To: | mlw <markw(at)mohawksoft(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Lee Kindness <lkindness(at)csl(dot)co(dot)uk>, Jan Wieck <janwieck(at)yahoo(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: How much work is a native Windows application? |
| Date: | 2002-05-09 19:31:24 |
| Message-ID: | 1020972686.2080.43.camel@rh72.home.ee |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 2002-05-09 at 19:23, mlw wrote:
> Lee Kindness wrote:
>
> >
> > Sure It'd be nice to have a native PostgreSQL on XP Server (I don't
> > see the point in consumer level Microsoft OSs) but how high is the
> > demand? What's the prize? What are the current limitations - fork,
> > semaphores, ugly interface...?
>
> The demand for PostgreSQL on Windows is currently as near to zero as you can
> imagine. This is probably because there is no viable PostgreSQL on Windows.
>
> If written correctly, a Win32 version of PostgreSQL would rock the Windows
> world. I see no reason why it would be limted to the "professional" version.
> Hell, it could even run on Windows 98.
Perhaps we could simpultaneously solve another problem - creating a
singlethreaded embeddable version of postgresql "engine"
-------------
Hannu
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Hannu Krosing | 2002-05-09 19:53:27 | Re: How much work is a native Windows application? |
| Previous Message | Jan Wieck | 2002-05-09 19:20:23 | Re: PG+Cygwin Production Experience (was RE: Path to PostgreSQL |