X-Original-To: pgsql-www-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.144]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D7CE14B2821 for ; Thu, 12 Aug 2004 05:31:26 -0300 (ADT) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 19066-01 for ; Thu, 12 Aug 2004 08:31:21 +0000 (GMT) Received: from anchor-post-37.mail.demon.net (anchor-post-36.mail.demon.net [194.217.242.86]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 048D214B2806 for ; Thu, 12 Aug 2004 05:31:20 -0300 (ADT) Received: from mailgate.vale-housing.co.uk ([80.176.1.146] helo=ratbert.vale-housing.co.uk) by anchor-post-37.mail.demon.net with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 1BvAza-000PoM-0b for pgsql-www@postgresql.org; Thu, 12 Aug 2004 08:31:22 +0000 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0 Subject: Re: PGSQL-WINDOWS mailing list? Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 09:31:21 +0100 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [pgsql-www] PGSQL-WINDOWS mailing list? Thread-Index: AcR/wI7806V2tIhFQOCZR1MRp9k1/gAhG51Q From: "Dave Page" To: "Josh Berkus" , "PostgreSQL www" X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 tagged_above=0.0 required=5.0 tests= X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200408/99 X-Sequence-Number: 4874 =20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Josh Berkus [mailto:josh@agliodbs.com]=20 > Sent: 11 August 2004 17:30 > To: Dave Page; PostgreSQL www > Subject: Re: [pgsql-www] PGSQL-WINDOWS mailing list? >=20 > > Well, unfortunately, at least 70% of the Windows users can be=20 > counted on not to differentiate platform-specific issues from=20 > general ones.=20=20 I think the same applies to many *nix users these days now that it's so easy to get a copy of Linux and give it a try. Mind you, I don't know that it would be 70% any more than you do ;-) > And given the flakyness of the platform, I=20 > expect there to be continuous issues.=20 Have you used any well admin'ed 2K/2K3 servers? I have roughly equal numbers of Linux and Windows 2K/2K3 servers here and get roughly equal reliability from both. I get far more hardware problems than OS, and they don't care what you're running. Windows may still be riddled with security holes, but it is pretty stable these days. > Also, I'd really=20 > rather not have a 25-post thread on PGSQL-SQL discussing how XP-SP3=20 > breaks PostgreSQL.=20=20=20 Nor would I want to see one in there about how ext-3 is horribly borked on Linux 2.6.66. I hardly think it's fair to assume that all Windows users are too stupid to post in the right place, but *nix users aren't. Even if it does look that way in the future, it may well just be because there end up being far more Windows users, but with a constant percentage of plonkers. I think I agree with Tom on this one - lets wait and see. It may be that a wholesale re-organisation of the lists will be the best option. Regards, dave.