> -----Original Message-----
> From: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org 
> [mailto:pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of 
> Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD
> Sent: Friday, March 05, 2004 1:20 AM
> To: jearl@bullysports.com; tswan@idigx.com
> Cc: Bruce Momjian; Tom Lane; Greg Stark; 
> pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; PostgreSQL Win32 port list
> Subject: Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] [HACKERS] Tablespaces
> 
> 
> 
> > First of all, symlinks are a pretty popular "feature."  
> Even Windows 
> > supports what would be needed.  Second of all, PostgreSQL 
> will still 
> > run on OSes without symlinks, tablespaces won't be available, but 
> > PostgreSQL will still run.  Since we are all using 
> PostgreSQL without
> 
> My idea for platforms that don't support symlinks would be to 
> simply create a tblspaceoid directory inplace instead of the 
> symlink (maybe throw a warning). My feeling is, that using 
> the same syntax on such platforms is important, 
> but actual distribution is not (since they will most likely 
> be small systems).

I know of bot SQL*Server and Oracle database systems on Win32 with
hundreds of millions of rows and many hundreds of gigabytes of space.
These are production systems, run by fortune 500 companies.

I expect that PostgreSQL systems on Win32 will have multiple 64-bit CPU
systems, with 16 gigs or so of ram, and a terabyte of disk, not long
after 7.5 is released (unless problems with PostgreSQL on that platform
turn up).

Is that what you have in mind when you say "small systems"?

I expect that one year after release, there will be ten times as many
PostgreSQL systems on Win32 as all combined versions now on UNIX flavors
(of course, that is a SWAG, but I think a sound one)

Thu, 10 Jun 2004 17:36:46 -0700
"Dann Corbit" <DCorbit@connx.com>
Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] Tablespaces
"Dann Corbit" <DCorbit@connx.com> writes:
> I expect that one year after release, there will be ten times as many
> PostgreSQL systems on Win32 as all combined versions now on UNIX flavors

I surely hope not.  Especially not multi-gig databases.  The folks
running those should know better than to use Windows, and if they
do not, I'll be happy to tell them so.

			regards, tom lane


Thu, 10 Jun 2004 23:23:45 -0400
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] Tablespaces 
Tom Lane wrote:

>"Dann Corbit" <DCorbit@connx.com> writes:
>  
>
>>I expect that one year after release, there will be ten times as many
>>PostgreSQL systems on Win32 as all combined versions now on UNIX flavors
>>    
>>
>
>I surely hope not.  Especially not multi-gig databases.  The folks
>running those should know better than to use Windows, and if they
>do not, I'll be happy to tell them so.
>  
>
Admins often don't have a choice, but a company strategy to use win 
only. Deciding on the platform before examining the app's requirements 
is always a bad idea, but that's what happens. Respecting this, 
suggesting "don't use win32 for high performance pgsql databasing" is 
equivalent to "don't use pgsql".

Regards,
Andreas





Fri, 11 Jun 2004 11:41:11 +0200
Andreas Pflug <pgadmin@pse-consulting.de>
Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] Tablespaces
> "Dann Corbit" <DCorbit@connx.com> writes:
>> I expect that one year after release, there will be ten times as many
>> PostgreSQL systems on Win32 as all combined versions now on UNIX flavors
>
> I surely hope not.  Especially not multi-gig databases.  The folks
> running those should know better than to use Windows, and if they
> do not, I'll be happy to tell them so.

This is a prejudice that we should try to avoid. Yes, Windows is lacking
on so many levels, but that really isn't the point.

A good box running Win2K or XP Server, with no internet connectivity, and
no user applications, can really perform and be reliable. Would I choose
this? Hell no, but there are HUGE amount of people who either don't know
any better or have no real choice.

The REAL bonus here is getting PostgreSQL in their hands. Right now, for
the small to medium business running Windows, Microsoft has a virtual lock
with SQL Server. SQL Server is expensive and a real PAIN.

Giving Windows users PostgreSQL with a good set of .NET, ODBC, and JDBC
drivers loosens the Microsoft stranglehold, just a little bit. If they
develop their application with MSSQL, there is a good chance it will never
use any open source software and always run on Windows. If they develop
their application using PostgreSQL, there is a better likelyhood that
other open source projects will be used, AND that should the requirement
be to upgrade the system, a wider range of OS and hardware options will
present themselves.



Fri, 11 Jun 2004 12:39:18 -0400 (EDT)
pgsql@mohawksoft.com
Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] Tablespaces