Re: How much work is a native Windows application?

From: Karel Zak <zakkr(at)zf(dot)jcu(dot)cz>
To: mlw <markw(at)mohawksoft(dot)com>
Cc: 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 07:25:04
Message-ID: 20020509092503.A16905@zf.jcu.cz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, May 07, 2002 at 01:16:01PM -0400, mlw wrote:
> I mentioned in another thread, Windows does not support "fork()." PostgreSQL
> seems irrevocably tied to using fork(). Without a drastic rewrite of how
> postmaster works, I don't see a way to make a pure Windows version.

I watch this discussion and only one question is still in my head:
how much people use Windows for server side part of stable application
based Oracle or DB2? Why my employer spend a lot of money with
SGI cluster + IRIX?

_IMHO_ if you want support Windows, please, write good tools for admins,
DB designers and developers (forms?). The server is really not a problem if
you think about real DB application. There is more important things in our
TODO than support GUI-OS for server running... (IMHO:-)

Karel

--
Karel Zak <zakkr(at)zf(dot)jcu(dot)cz>
http://home.zf.jcu.cz/~zakkr/

C, PostgreSQL, PHP, WWW, http://docs.linux.cz, http://mape.jcu.cz

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Lincoln Yeoh 2002-05-09 07:34:06 Re: Path to PostgreSQL portabiliy
Previous Message Dave Page 2002-05-09 07:12:04 Re: OK, lets talk portability.