Re: Microsoft releses Services for Unix

Dave Page wrote:
> Steve Tibbett wrote:
> > Windows users will always prefer a Windows solution to a Unix
> > solution running on SFU... I'd say sticking with the original
> > goal of making a native Win32 version would be preferable.
>
> Plus I'll bet we couldn't distribute the required components ourselves
> and would thus require the user to download interix first.

Yes, but consider this:
1. from a windows developer's point of view, requiring Interix is no
better or worse than requiring cygwin or mingw, except for maybe the
size of the download/install.

2. Interix will be faster than any emulated I/O. sync() right now is
very slow because there is no corresponding win32 API call. Interix
implements this as an optimized kernel mode driver. That right there is
reason enough for me.

3. Postgres no longer contains tons of extra code specifically to
support windows.

4. 'Native' is a funny term. Interix runs at the same operations level
as the win32 API (not above it, as cygwin, or application level
emulation code). To a certain way of thinking, Interix applications are
more native than win32 API code written to achieve the same purpose.

The soon to be released version 3.5 has greatly beefed up performance
and support for threads. Unless I completely misunderstand things,
getting a native win32 port for postgresql off the ground will boil down
to downloading interix and hacking out a configure script...is this
correct?

Merlin

Merlin Moncure wrote:
> Dave Page wrote:
> > Steve Tibbett wrote:
> > > Windows users will always prefer a Windows solution to a Unix
> > > solution running on SFU... I'd say sticking with the original
> > > goal of making a native Win32 version would be preferable.
> >
> > Plus I'll bet we couldn't distribute the required components ourselves
> > and would thus require the user to download interix first.
>
> Yes, but consider this:
> 1. from a windows developer's point of view, requiring Interix is no
> better or worse than requiring cygwin or mingw, except for maybe the
> size of the download/install.

FYI, we require mingw to compile PostgreSQL on Win32, not to run
PostgreSQL on Win32, right?

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

Bruce Momjian said:
> Merlin Moncure wrote:
>> Dave Page wrote:
>> > Steve Tibbett wrote:
>> > > Windows users will always prefer a Windows solution to a Unix
>> > > solution running on SFU... I'd say sticking with the original goal
>> > > of making a native Win32 version would be preferable.
>> >
>> > Plus I'll bet we couldn't distribute the required components
>> > ourselves and would thus require the user to download interix first.
>>
>> Yes, but consider this:
>> 1. from a windows developer's point of view, requiring Interix is no
>> better or worse than requiring cygwin or mingw, except for maybe the
>> size of the download/install.
>
> FYI, we require mingw to compile PostgreSQL on Win32, not to run
> PostgreSQL on Win32, right?
>

Yes, of course. Otherwise we have all been wasting our time very badly ;-)

In fact, it's quite important that all work be tested from a Windows
command prompt, and not just from inside Mingw. I know I found numerous
errors that I corrected that way.

cheers

andrew