Some comments from Jason Tishler the Cygwin-PostgreSQL maintainer...

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jason Tishler [mailto:jason@tishler.net] 
> Sent: 10 May 2002 15:00
> To: Dave Page
> Cc: pgsql-cygwin@postgresql.org
> Subject: Cygwin PostgreSQL Information and Suggestions
> 
> 
> Dave,
> 
> Would you forward this to pgsql-hackers since I'm not subscribed?
> 
> On Thu, May 09, 2002 at 10:45:42PM +0100, Dave Page wrote:
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Jason Tishler [mailto:jason@tishler.net]
> > > Sent: 09 May 2002 21:52
> > > To: Dave Page
> > > 
> > > On Thu, May 09, 2002 at 07:51:33PM +0100, Dave Page wrote:
> > > > BTW Are you aware there is currently a rather busy thread
> > > > about native Windows/Beos ports on -hackers...
> > > 
> > > No, I'm not subscribed, but I just read all that I could find
> > > in the archives.
> > > [snip]
> > > 
> > > > ...which is currently drifting towards a cutdown Cygwin version?
> > > 
> > > Maybe I'll be out of (another) job soon? :,)
> > 
> > [snip]
> > 
> > Personnally, I think (from a 'good for PostgreSQL' rather 
> than 'good 
> > for Cygwin' perspective) that the way forward is a Cygwin 
> based system 
> > but using a tailored downloader/installer that installs the system 
> > 'like a Windows app' (and quickly & easily etc.) rather than the 
> > current way which is Windows 'being' *nix. I think that's very 
> > offputting for many potential users (as others have said on the 
> > -hackers thread).
> 
> I agree with the above, but more can be done with Cygwin and 
> its setup.exe that can give a fair amount of bang for the 
> buck for some good short time gains too.  I will give some 
> details below.
> 
> I also wanted to dispel some misinformation (IMO) that I 
> perceived from the above mentioned posts and/or elaborate on 
> some of the items:
> 
> 1. Cygwin's setup.exe supports categories and dependencies.  
> Hence, there is no reason to install all Cygwin packages in 
> order to ensure properly PostgreSQL operation.  Someone just 
> has to determine what is the minimal set of packages 
> necessary for PostgreSQL and I will update the setup.hint 
> accordingly.  The current setup.hint is as follows:
> 
>     sdesc: "PostgreSQL Data Base Management System"
>     category: Database
>     requires: ash cygwin readline zlib libreadline5
> 
> Sorry, but since I install all Cygwin packages plus about 30 
> additional ones I haven't desire to determine what are the 
> minimal requirements.
> 
> 2. Cygwin's setup.exe is customizable.  There is a tool 
> called "upset" that generates the setup.ini file that drives 
> setup.exe.  PostgreSQL could offer a customized setup.  For 
> example, this is what the XEmacs folks are doing.
> 
> 3. Cygwin's setup.exe can run package specific postinstall 
> scripts during the installation.  Hence, someone could 
> automate the steps enumerated (e.g., postmaster NT service 
> installation, initdb, etc.) in my README:
> 
 
http://www.tishler.net/jason/software/postgresql/postgresql-7.2.1.README

to ease the installation burden.

4. Cygwin PostgreSQL is perceived to have poor performance.  I have
never done any benchmarks regarding this issue, but apparently Terry
Carlin (from the defunct Great Bridge) did:

    http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-cygwin/2001-08/msg00029.php

Specifically, he indicates the following:

    BTW, Up through 40 users, PostgreSQL under CYGWIN using the TPC-C
    benchmark performed very much the same as Linux PostgreSQL on the
    exact hardware.

5. Cygwin PostgreSQL is perceived to have poor reliability.
Unfortunately, I have not been able to gather data to concur or refute
this perception due a sudden job "change" last summer. :,)  However,
there are reports such as the following on the pgsql-cygwin list:

    http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-cygwin/2002-04/msg00021.php

IMO, the biggest reliability issue with Cygwin PostgreSQL is it's
dependency on cygipc.  There is some very recent work to create a Cygwin
daemon to support features such as System V IPC.  So soon the cygipc
dependency and its "problems" will be going way.

Those interested in a "Windows" PostgreSQL should possibly consider
contributing in this area or other "hard edges" (due to Windows-isms)
that would improve the reliability of Cygwin PostgreSQL.  BTW, I have
found the Cygwin core developers very responsive to PostgreSQL problems
because it drives the Cygwin DLL harder than most other applications.

6. Satisfying the Cygwin license for binary distribution is very simple.
Just include the source for the Cygwin DLL and all executables that are
linked with it in your distribution package.  It is really that easy.

Jason

Fri, 10 May 2002 14:55:53 +0100
"Dave Page" <dpage@vale-housing.co.uk>
FW: Cygwin PostgreSQL Information and Suggestions
"Dave Page" <dpage@vale-housing.co.uk> forwards:
> 4. Cygwin PostgreSQL is perceived to have poor performance.  I have
> never done any benchmarks regarding this issue, but apparently Terry
> Carlin (from the defunct Great Bridge) did:

>     http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-cygwin/2001-08/msg00029.php

> Specifically, he indicates the following:

>     BTW, Up through 40 users, PostgreSQL under CYGWIN using the TPC-C
>     benchmark performed very much the same as Linux PostgreSQL on the
>     exact hardware.

It should be noted that the benchmark Terry is describing fires up
N concurrent backends and then measures the runtime for a specific query
workload.  So it's not measuring connection startup time, which is
alleged by some to be Cygwin's weak spot.  Nonetheless, I invite the
Postgres-on-Cygwin-isn't-worth-our-time camp to produce some benchmarks
supporting their position.  I'm getting tired of reading unsubstantiated
assertions.

			regards, tom lane

Fri, 10 May 2002 12:31:06 -0400
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: FW: Cygwin PostgreSQL Information and Suggestions 
> > 1. Cygwin's setup.exe supports categories and dependencies.
> > Hence, there is no reason to install all Cygwin packages in
> > order to ensure properly PostgreSQL operation.  Someone just
> > has to determine what is the minimal set of packages
> > necessary for PostgreSQL and I will update the setup.hint
> > accordingly.  The current setup.hint is as follows:
> >
> >     sdesc: "PostgreSQL Data Base Management System"
> >     category: Database
> >     requires: ash cygwin readline zlib libreadline5
> >
> > Sorry, but since I install all Cygwin packages plus about 30
> > additional ones I haven't desire to determine what are the
> > minimal requirements.

If no one else has done this, I'll be happy to dig in and answer this.

> > 2. Cygwin's setup.exe is customizable.  There is a tool
> > called "upset" that generates the setup.ini file that drives
> > setup.exe.  PostgreSQL could offer a customized setup.  For
> > example, this is what the XEmacs folks are doing.

This is a great start to a more Win-feeling PG.

> > 3. Cygwin's setup.exe can run package specific postinstall
> > scripts during the installation.  Hence, someone could
> > automate the steps enumerated (e.g., postmaster NT service
> > installation, initdb, etc.) in my README:
> >
>
> http://www.tishler.net/jason/software/postgresql/postgresql-7.2.1.README

This is a great document. I had missed this before.

>
> Specifically, he indicates the following:
>
>     BTW, Up through 40 users, PostgreSQL under CYGWIN using the TPC-C
>     benchmark performed very much the same as Linux PostgreSQL on the
>     exact hardware.

Interesting. Does anyone that has mentioned poor performance on cygwin have
any numbers to dispute this?

> Jason

Thanks for the info, and thanks for your work on the PG + cygwin stuff!

- J.

Joel BURTON | joel@joelburton.com | joelburton.com | aim: wjoelburton
Knowledge Management & Technology Consultant


Fri, 10 May 2002 12:43:16 -0400
"Joel Burton" <joel@joelburton.com>
Re: FW: Cygwin PostgreSQL Information and Suggestions
> -----Original Message-----
> From: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org
> [mailto:pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org]On Behalf Of Tom Lane
> Sent: Friday, May 10, 2002 12:31 PM
> To: Dave Page
> Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Jason@tishler.net
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] FW: Cygwin PostgreSQL Information and Suggestions
>
>
>
> "Dave Page" <dpage@vale-housing.co.uk> forwards:
> > 4. Cygwin PostgreSQL is perceived to have poor performance.  I have
> > never done any benchmarks regarding this issue, but apparently Terry
> > Carlin (from the defunct Great Bridge) did:
>
> >     http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-cygwin/2001-08/msg00029.php
>
> > Specifically, he indicates the following:
>
> >     BTW, Up through 40 users, PostgreSQL under CYGWIN using the TPC-C
> >     benchmark performed very much the same as Linux PostgreSQL on the
> >     exact hardware.
>
> It should be noted that the benchmark Terry is describing fires up
> N concurrent backends and then measures the runtime for a specific query
> workload.  So it's not measuring connection startup time, which is
> alleged by some to be Cygwin's weak spot.  Nonetheless, I invite the
> Postgres-on-Cygwin-isn't-worth-our-time camp to produce some benchmarks
> supporting their position.  I'm getting tired of reading unsubstantiated
> assertions.

... and it's worth remembering, too, that for some cases, connect time is
completely unimportant: most of my work against PG is using shared,
persistent connections from a web app (Zope); it could take 20 mins to make
the initial connection and I'd still be happy. (Note to hackers: do not
implement this 20min connect, though. :) )

- J.

Joel BURTON | joel@joelburton.com | joelburton.com | aim: wjoelburton
Knowledge Management & Technology Consultant


Fri, 10 May 2002 12:51:41 -0400
"Joel Burton" <joel@joelburton.com>
Re: FW: Cygwin PostgreSQL Information and Suggestions 
Joel,

On Fri, May 10, 2002 at 12:43:16PM -0400, Joel Burton wrote:
> > > Sorry, but since I install all Cygwin packages plus about 30
> > > additional ones I haven't desire to determine what are the
> > > minimal requirements.
> 
> If no one else has done this, I'll be happy to dig in and answer this.

Saravanan Bellan has provided a file list, but not a package list.
Would you be willing to do the conversion?  See the following:

    http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-cygwin/2002-05/msg00030.php

> > http://www.tishler.net/jason/software/postgresql/postgresql-7.2.1.README

> This is a great document. I had missed this before.

I'm glad that you found the above useful.

> Thanks for the info, and thanks for your work on the PG + cygwin stuff!

You are very welcome.

BTW, I'm on pgsql-hackers now -- YAML, sigh...  If you want to get my
attention, just make sure "cygwin" is in the subject and procmail will
do its magic. :,)

Jason

Sun, 12 May 2002 10:34:37 -0400
Jason Tishler <jason@tishler.net>
Re: FW: Cygwin PostgreSQL Information and Suggestions