> Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > My big question is, what new challenges will we face as we become more
> > popular?
>
> The 3 greatest technical/engineering challenges:
1) system reliability
> & recoverability,
2) system reliability & recoverability, and
3) system reliability
> and reco
On Thu, 30 Dec 1999, Robert wrote:
> Hi,
>
> one of the important factors that contributed to the popularity and success of
> Apache, Perl, Tcl/Tk etc. was their platform independence. I'm big fan of Unix (and
> even bigger of Postgres ;-), but BeOS, MacOS X, even Win2000 all look quite
> inter
Hi,
one of the important factors that contributed to the popularity and success of
Apache, Perl, Tcl/Tk etc. was their platform independence. I'm big fan of Unix (and
even bigger of Postgres ;-), but BeOS, MacOS X, even Win2000 all look quite
interesting too and I don't want to tie myself to jus
> P.S. Cygwin is definitely one of the options, but RedHat/Cygnus's plans are not very
>
> clear at this point and few months ago there were even some rumors about plans for
> 'more restrictive licence' for cygwin - and anyway, cygwin wouldn't be of any help
> to Mac/BeOS/VAX/mainframe people.
W
Hi,
one of the important factors that contributed to the popularity and success of
Apache, Perl, Tcl/Tk etc. was their platform independence. I'm big fan of Unix (and
even bigger of Postgres ;-), but BeOS, MacOS X, even Win2000 all look quite
interesting too and I don't want to tie myself to jus
--The
reboots are for hardware upgrades!"www.nmmm.nu"; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
- Original Message -
From: Nikolay Mijaylov
To: pgsql-general
Sent: ÐÏÎÅÄÅÌÎÉË, äÅËÅÍ×ÒÉ 27, 1999 03:27
Subject: Re: [GE
Hi,
Yes, I think reliability needs more work. I've had quite a few problems with
system indexes getting corrupted (number of tuples incorrect and some other
bizarre problems). Very hard to pin down as I haven't been able to reproduce any
of these cases. I've got the feeling that there may be
john huttley wrote:
> > I believe we are adding Oracle compatibility as possible. We are
> > working on write-ahead log, long tuples, foreign keys, and outer joins.
> > Anything else?
>
> Yes, earlier in the year I was trying to migrate from Pervasive SQL to
> posgtres and
> came to a screaming
On Sun, 26 Dec 1999, Howie wrote:
> On Sat, 25 Dec 1999, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sat, 25 Dec 1999, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > > My big question is, what new challenges will we face as
> > > > we become more popular?
> > >
> > > Plug-in Oracle 7 compatibility.
> >
> > I
On Sun, 26 Dec 1999, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > - A dump program that can dump/restore large objects.
> >
> > Don't get me wrong. I'm not complaining, and we work with PostgreSQL a lot
> > without any big problems. Just some ideas to make it easier for the
> > administrator.
>
> We are going to
Well,
I like to see replication, at least snapshot type, and later merge type...
Snapshot should allow load balancing while querying db, and allow distributed
web/db server. The replication should work over LAN/WAN and snailmail. The
replication shouldn't be dependent of a transport/network confi
On Sun, 26 Dec 1999, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> On Sat, 25 Dec 1999, Clark C. Evans wrote:
> > Plug-in Oracle 7 compatibility.
>
> I know we have (and have for awhile) a good deal of Oracle
> compatibility...what do you mean by 'Plug-In Oracle 7 compatibility'?
Plug in Oracle compatibility would
Mike Mascari wrote:
>
> Thomas Reinke wrote:
>
> > 1) Up front, I'll state that we use 6.3, so a number of
> >the technical glitches may have been solved since...
>
> 6.3 is unbelievably old. Perhaps you weren't getting responses since most
> people don't use versions of PostgreSQL that o
Thomas Reinke wrote:
> 1) Up front, I'll state that we use 6.3, so a number of
>the technical glitches may have been solved since...
6.3 is unbelievably old. Perhaps you weren't getting responses since most
people don't use versions of PostgreSQL that old? I know I tend not to respond
to pos
> I believe we are adding Oracle compatibility as possible. We
are
> working on write-ahead log, long tuples, foreign keys, and
outer
> joins.
> Anything else?
Yes, PL/SQL compatibility would be nice. ;-)
Bye,
Oliver
#--{ [EMAIL PROTECTED] }
Oliver Fischer, Glei
At 10:27 PM 12/25/99, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>[snip]
> > Plug-in Oracle 7 compatibility.
>
>I believe we are adding Oracle compatibility as possible. We are
>working on write-ahead log, long tuples, foreign keys, and outer joins.
>Anything else?
Replication would be nice, or some other form of clu
>
> > once again. The *perception* remains, however, that pgsql still
> > leaves a bit to be desired in the areas of reliability and
> > maintainability. This needs to be remedied. Like I said, progress
> > has been mad, but it appears pgsql isn't quite out of the woods yet.
>
> I keep hearin
"Marc G. Fournier" wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Dec 1999, Ed Loehr wrote:
>
> > Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >
> > > We don't have roll-forward logging until 7.1, and require vacuum
> > > regularly. Other than that, I don't know of any major issues.
> > > Reliability has always been of primary importance. We
[Charset iso-8859-1 unsupported, filtering to ASCII...]
> Hi,
>
> > > The 3 greatest technical/engineering challenges: 1) system
> > > reliability & recoverability, 2) system reliability & recoverability,
> > > and 3) system reliability and recoverability.
> >
> > And we don't have a problem in
> Howdy
>
> A question, if you still have some code in the source that
> originated at Berkeley how do you change the license?
>
> Do you breakout new code from old code and have a different
> license for old vs. new code?
Just add it to the top. If someone wants it without oure
[Charset iso-8859-1 unsupported, filtering to ASCII...]
> > I believe we are adding Oracle compatibility as possible. We are
> > working on write-ahead log, long tuples, foreign keys, and outer joins.
> > Anything else?
>
> Yes, earlier in the year I was trying to migrate from Pervasive SQL to
>
On Sat, 25 Dec 1999, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Sat, 25 Dec 1999, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > My big question is, what new challenges will we face as
> > > we become more popular?
> >
> > Plug-in Oracle 7 compatibility.
>
> I believe we are adding Oracle compatibility as possible. W
Howdy
A question, if you still have some code in the source that
originated at Berkeley how do you change the license?
Do you breakout new code from old code and have a different
license for old vs. new code?
> I'm against any change in license, except for the upcoming exten
> I believe we are adding Oracle compatibility as possible. We are
> working on write-ahead log, long tuples, foreign keys, and outer joins.
> Anything else?
Yes, earlier in the year I was trying to migrate from Pervasive SQL to
posgtres and
came to a screaming halt when it wouldn't do a large v
On Sun, 26 Dec 1999, Ed Loehr wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > We don't have roll-forward logging until 7.1, and require vacuum
> > regularly. Other than that, I don't know of any major issues.
> > Reliability has always been of primary importance. We wouldn't be where
> > we are today wit
> I don't think the *BSD's have intentionally tried any such thing. You
> could possibly have picked up these vibes from certain members of the Open
> BSD camp, but I wouldn't extend them to encompass the *BSD community at
> large. (And I wonder if I should comment about how Linux people are
On Sat, 25 Dec 1999, Clark C. Evans wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, 25 Dec 1999, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > My big question is, what new challenges will we face as
> > we become more popular?
>
> Plug-in Oracle 7 compatibility.
I know we have (and have for awhile) a good deal of Oracle
compatibility...
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> We don't have roll-forward logging until 7.1, and require vacuum
> regularly. Other than that, I don't know of any major issues.
> Reliability has always been of primary importance. We wouldn't be where
> we are today without reliability.
Here's an idea: How about a web
On Sat, 25 Dec 1999, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > On Sat, 25 Dec 1999, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > My big question is, what new challenges will we face as
> > > we become more popular?
> >
> > Plug-in Oracle 7 compatibility.
>
> I believe we are adding Oracle compatibility as possible. We are
> wor
>
>
> On Sat, 25 Dec 1999, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > My big question is, what new challenges will we face as
> > we become more popular?
>
> Plug-in Oracle 7 compatibility.
I believe we are adding Oracle compatibility as possible. We are
working on write-ahead log, long tuples, foreign keys,
On Sat, 25 Dec 1999, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> My big question is, what new challenges will we face as
> we become more popular?
Plug-in Oracle 7 compatibility.
> > > system that won't stay up consistently is approaching worthlessness
> > > for mission-critical 24x7 applications. And if the masses
> > > leave because of system reliability problems, you can be very,
> > > very certain about what they will tell their friends and coworkers.
> >
> > And we
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > My big question is, what new challenges will we face as we
> become more > popular?
>
> The 3 greatest technical/engineering challenges: 1) system
> reliability & recoverability, 2) system reliability & recoverability,
> and 3) system reliability and recoverability.
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >
> > > My big question is, what new challenges will we face as we
> > become more > popular?
> >
> > The 3 greatest technical/engineering challenges: 1) system
> > reliability & recoverability, 2) system reliability & recoverability,
> > and 3) sy
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> My big question is, what new challenges will we face as we become more
> popular?
The 3 greatest technical/engineering challenges: 1) system reliability
& recoverability, 2) system reliability & recoverability, and 3) system reliability
and recoverability. The masses won
> >We certainly have the power to add a license of our own. BSDI has done
> >this, as well as many other companies. I don't want to wait until
> >things get very busy and then try to address these issues. We may
> >decide we don't want to do anything, but I would like to decide that
> >now.
>
On Sat, 25 Dec 1999, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> On Sat, 25 Dec 1999, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> The worst thing we could do is to intentionally try to stay less than
>> popular. There's a reason Linux is taking off and *BSD isn't really, and
>> it's not technology. (Sorry, Marc.)
>
>I think everyone can
> On Sat, 25 Dec 1999, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > Consider this:
> >
> > The stock market going crazy over Linux stocks
> > Interbase users are considering moving en-mass to PostgreSQL
> > Publishers are crawling all over each other to publish a PostgreSQL book
These three items rep
On Sat, 25 Dec 1999, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Consider this:
>
> The stock market going crazy over Linux stocks
> Interbase users are considering moving en-mass to PostgreSQL
> Publishers are crawling all over each other to publish a PostgreSQL book
>
> With these signs, it is p
Consider this:
The stock market going crazy over Linux stocks
Interbase users are considering moving en-mass to PostgreSQL
Publishers are crawling all over each other to publish a PostgreSQL book
With these signs, it is possible we may be _very_ popular in the near
future
40 matches
Mail list logo
