From: | "Thomas G(dot) Lockhart" <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu> |
---|---|
To: | Horak Daniel <horak(at)mmp(dot)plzen-city(dot)cz> |
Cc: | "'Bruce Momjian'" <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)hub(dot)org, JKraaijeveld(at)askesis(dot)nl |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] NT port of PGSQL - success |
Date: | 1998-10-08 15:36:09 |
Message-ID: | 361CDBE9.EB6625AB@alumni.caltech.edu |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> The problem is that there exists file PG_VERSION where is the current
> version stored (now 6.4) in the directory ./data/base/template1 and
> when the bootstrap code wants to create pg_version system table it
> stops because the file with the "same" name already exists.
> I think we should wait for the final 6.4 version (I hope it will be
> soon available) and than make a patch against it and include it also
> in the 6.5 development tree.
Most of us aren't NT propellerheads, but now that a port might be
available I'm sure the mailing lists will get more folks who are. Then a
tremendous step forward such as you've take will be greeted with more
enthusiasm :)
> There are some open issues yet.
> now some explanations:
> - int8 - the libc does probably have no support for long long ints in
> printf()
There is a local definition for snprintf() which might have this support
for you. Look in backend/port/snprintf.c
> - run_ruletest - the difference is only in the name that is selected
> from the tables
> - many other tests failed due to not having the dynamicly loaded code
> in DLLs
Is DLL support so different that it will never work, or have you not had
time to look at it?
I would like to list NT as being "supported with patches, see web site"
for the next release (or "partially supported..."). Is it premature to
do that?
Good work btw...
- Tom
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 1998-10-08 15:36:53 | Re: [HACKERS] NT port of PGSQL - success |
Previous Message | Horak Daniel | 1998-10-08 09:26:15 | RE: [HACKERS] NT port of PGSQL - success |