Re: Compression and on-disk sorting

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Ron Mayer <rm_pg(at)cheapcomplexdevices(dot)com>
Cc: "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Compression and on-disk sorting
Date: 2006-05-16 00:12:06
Message-ID: 470.1147738326@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Ron Mayer <rm_pg(at)cheapcomplexdevices(dot)com> writes:
> I think the real reason Oracle and others practically re-wrote
> their own VM-system and filesystems is that at the time it was
> important for them to run under Windows98; where it was rather
> easy to write better filesystems than your customer's OS was
> bundled with.

Windows98? No, those decisions predate any thought of running Oracle
on Windows, probably by decades. But I think the thought process was
about as above whenever they did make it; they were running on some
pretty stupid OSes way back when.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Joshua D. Drake 2006-05-16 00:42:53 Re: Compression and on-disk sorting
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2006-05-15 23:43:20 Re: Mention pg_dump version portability