On Wed, 29 Jan 2003, Dave Page wrote: > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Vince Vielhaber [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: 29 January 2003 17:10 > > To: Dave Page > > Cc: Katie Ward; Tom Lane; Curtis Faith; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: RE: [mail] Re: [HACKERS] Windows Build System > > > > > > On Wed, 29 Jan 2003, Dave Page wrote: > > > > > I would be interested to know how many windows servers > > those that are > > > against a windows port of PostgreSQL have or do manage, and how > > > experienced they are with that platform... > > > > At this point I'm not for or against. But you're going to > > have to do more than a weeks worth of unscientific testing to > > prove your point and move from assumptions to facts. > > No problem with that. Likewise however, it'd be nice if people weren't > against the windows port until testing had proved it didn't work > properly. Would we have the same general reactions to a revived VMS port > or one for OS/2 (not counting Tom's which is an valid concern over a > specific issue)? I suspect not...
VMS and OS/2 have proven track records of being rugged. Windows has always had a reputation of being fragile. And yes, I have extensive experience with all three. Vince. -- Fast, inexpensive internet service 56k and beyond! http://www.pop4.net/ http://www.meanstreamradio.com http://www.unknown-artists.com Internet radio: It's not file sharing, it's just radio. ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
