Re: Path to PostgreSQL portabiliy

> -----Original Message-----
> From: pgsql-hackers-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org
> [mailto:pgsql-hackers-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org]On Behalf Of mlw
> Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2002 10:16 AM
> To: Tom Lane
> Cc: PostgreSQL-development; Jan Wieck; Marc G. Fournier; Dann Corbit
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Path to PostgreSQL portabiliy
>
> IMHO, I think a great PostgreSQL implementation for Win32 is a nail in the
> coffin for Windows. If we give them a great database, which runs
> well under
> Windows, for free, MSSQL will now have a serious competitor for
> the medium to
> small marketplace.
>
> Once MSSQL has viable cross-platform competition in this space, one less
> requirement for Windows will exist. Right now, if you implement
> on Windows, you
> are most likely going to use MSSQL and be stuck there. With a good Win32
> PostgreSQL, an engineer can implement on PostgreSQL for Windows,
> and easily
> move it to a "real" environment for stability.
>
> I see it as an important step.

... and for IT staff who do their play-work on the Windows laptops, and to
help compete against MySQL, which has a strong, out-of-the-box Windows
binary, and for people who think it's easier to install and play with things
on Windows first, and ...

It seems like there are lot of open paths discussions, though:

. make cygwin perform better (does it perform badly? is it unstable?)

. make cygwin easier to install

. make windows native (req's semaphore, fork, some shell utils, etc.)

I've installed PG+Cygwin on a few dozen machines, but always to let people
play before the real *nix install. Can anyone speak to _really_ using PG +
Cygwin?

Joel BURTON | joel(at)joelburton(dot)com | joelburton.com | aim: wjoelburton
Knowledge Management & Technology Consultant