On Wed, 29 Jan 2003, Katie Ward wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Vince Vielhaber > > Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 11:45 AM > > 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: > > > > > > hammering the betas is a far cry from an "industrial-strength > > > > solution". > > > > > > Have you a better suggestion? Seems a bit catch 22 if testing won't > > > prove it's good and we can't use it until we know it's good... Still, > > > industrial strength testing or not, it's more reliable than the SQL 2000 > > > and DB2 installations I have here. > > > > Well you have a beta running, load it up with data and let a few hundred > > clients loose on it. I've seen win2k BSOD with less stress than that. > > > > Vince. > > We did that as part of our internal testing, using the ATM database and a > dual-processor machine. We tried both with clients connecting and > disconnection quickly, and with large numbers of clients that stayed > connected for a while, all extremely active. Native Win32 performed > comparably with running the same test on comparable machines on LINUX. > Nothing crashed.
The code's been available for what a week or two? Do you actually think that can be considered conclusive by any standard? 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
