Log Message:
-----------
Update that 8.0 will support MS Win natively.

Modified Files:
--------------
    pgsql-server/doc:
        FAQ (r1.266 -> r1.267)
        (http://developer.postgresql.org/cvsweb.cgi/pgsql-server/doc/FAQ.diff?r1=1.266&r2=1.267)
    pgsql-server/doc/src/FAQ:
        FAQ.html (r1.224 -> r1.225)
        (http://developer.postgresql.org/cvsweb.cgi/pgsql-server/doc/src/FAQ/FAQ.html.diff?r1=1.224&r2=1.225)

Mon, 23 Aug 2004 18:51:53 -0300 (ADT)
momjian@svr1.postgresql.org (Bruce Momjian)
pgsql-server: Update that 8.0 will support MS Win natively.
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Update that 8.0 will support MS Win natively.

I've noticed that when we mention Win32 native support in 8.0 (both here 
and in the release notes), we don't say it is "considered to be beta", 
or "less well-tested than PostgreSQL for Unix systems", or some other 
caveat. While I haven't used the Win32 port myself, I still think such a 
disclaimer would be wise: the Win32 port has received a tiny fraction of 
the testing that the Unix port has. So we really *don't* know how 
unstable/buggy it may be, and until we have more data, I think 
under-promising is a good idea.

(... or has this already been discussed over the summer?)

-Neil


Mon, 23 Aug 2004 16:29:09 -0700
Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com>
Re: pgsql-server: Update that 8.0 will support MS Win
Neil Conway wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Update that 8.0 will support MS Win natively.
> 
> I've noticed that when we mention Win32 native support in 8.0 (both here 
> and in the release notes), we don't say it is "considered to be beta", 
> or "less well-tested than PostgreSQL for Unix systems", or some other 
> caveat. While I haven't used the Win32 port myself, I still think such a 
> disclaimer would be wise: the Win32 port has received a tiny fraction of 
> the testing that the Unix port has. So we really *don't* know how 
> unstable/buggy it may be, and until we have more data, I think 
> under-promising is a good idea.
> 
> (... or has this already been discussed over the summer?)

I think we need to actually find someone who reports a problem before
stating something.  I don't see how we can assume it is unstable without
some feedback.

Everyone knows it is is a new feature so I assume they will realize
their might be some rough edges.

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

Mon, 23 Aug 2004 19:40:39 -0400 (EDT)
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
Re: pgsql-server: Update that 8.0 will support MS Win
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> I think we need to actually find someone who reports a problem before
> stating something.  I don't see how we can assume it is unstable without
> some feedback.

You have *got* to be kidding.  It's a new port with major changes
needed, and you're going to assume it is bulletproof?  We do not work
that way on this project --- we err on the side of conservatism not
optimism.

In any case, it's not like we haven't been seeing plenty of bug reports
from users of the Windows beta.  Many of these may be pilot error, but
I wouldn't care to assume they all are.

			regards, tom lane

Mon, 23 Aug 2004 19:45:51 -0400
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: pgsql-server: Update that 8.0 will support MS Win 
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> I think we need to actually find someone who reports a problem before
> stating something.  I don't see how we can assume it is unstable without
> some feedback.

On the contrary, I don't see how we can assume it IS stable without any 
evidence (which is effectively what we're doing if we release 8.0.0 
without any special note about how stable we expect Win32 to be: we're 
treating unix and win32 equally, when they clearly are not from the POV 
of testing and maturity).

This is enterprise software -- I think it would be wise for us to be 
conservative about what we promise our users.

> Everyone knows it is is a new feature so I assume they will realize
> their might be some rough edges.

If "everyone knows", why not document it?

-Neil


Mon, 23 Aug 2004 16:46:31 -0700
Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com>
Re: pgsql-server: Update that 8.0 will support MS Win
Neil Conway wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > I think we need to actually find someone who reports a problem before
> > stating something.  I don't see how we can assume it is unstable without
> > some feedback.
> 
> On the contrary, I don't see how we can assume it IS stable without any 
> evidence (which is effectively what we're doing if we release 8.0.0 
> without any special note about how stable we expect Win32 to be: we're 
> treating unix and win32 equally, when they clearly are not from the POV 
> of testing and maturity).
> 
> This is enterprise software -- I think it would be wise for us to be 
> conservative about what we promise our users.

What makes it more different from saying PITR, NT, or tablespaces might
have bugs because those are new features too.  What is the distinction?

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

Mon, 23 Aug 2004 19:50:22 -0400 (EDT)
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
Re: pgsql-server: Update that 8.0 will support MS Win
On Mon, 23 Aug 2004, Bruce Momjian wrote:

> Neil Conway wrote:
>> Bruce Momjian wrote:
>>> I think we need to actually find someone who reports a problem before
>>> stating something.  I don't see how we can assume it is unstable without
>>> some feedback.
>>
>> On the contrary, I don't see how we can assume it IS stable without any
>> evidence (which is effectively what we're doing if we release 8.0.0
>> without any special note about how stable we expect Win32 to be: we're
>> treating unix and win32 equally, when they clearly are not from the POV
>> of testing and maturity).
>>
>> This is enterprise software -- I think it would be wise for us to be
>> conservative about what we promise our users.
>
> What makes it more different from saying PITR, NT, or tablespaces might
> have bugs because those are new features too.  What is the distinction?

they are new features, not new ports ...

Win32 is a new platform that we are supporting, and the likelihood of 
someone finding a bug somewhere in the tens of thousands of lines of code 
that is "windows specific" right now is fairly high ...

adding NT/PITR adds a feature that unless someone *really* screwed up, 
doesn't have the potential of finding a bug *anywhere* in our code other 
then where they tie into it, so its alot less of an impact overall ...

And that probably isn't worded as well as I'd like ... basically, *none* 
of our code is *well tested* on Windows, where is *most* of our code is 
well tested under Unix ... the only common "not well tested" code is the 
new features we add during the release ...

----
Marc G. Fournier           Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: scrappy@hub.org           Yahoo!: yscrappy              ICQ: 7615664

Tue, 24 Aug 2004 08:50:44 -0300 (ADT)
"Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@postgresql.org>
Re: pgsql-server: Update that 8.0 will support MS Win
On Tue, Aug 24, 2004 at 08:50:44AM -0300, Marc G. Fournier wrote:

> adding NT/PITR adds a feature that unless someone *really* screwed up, 
> doesn't have the potential of finding a bug *anywhere* in our code other 
> then where they tie into it, so its alot less of an impact overall ...

At least NT is so invasive that it has to potential to really screw
up ... in fact several ugly bugs have been detected and corrected already
(thanks guys!), not sure how many more are still waiting to be found.

-- 
Alvaro Herrera (<alvherre[a]dcc.uchile.cl>)
"La principal caracterï¿½stica humana es la tonterï¿½a"
(Augusto Monterroso)


Tue, 24 Aug 2004 10:09:32 -0400
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@dcc.uchile.cl>
Re: pgsql-server: Update that 8.0 will support MS Win
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> I think we need to actually find someone who reports a problem before
> stating something.  I don't see how we can assume it is unstable without
> some feedback.

My count is three votes in favour of adding a disclaimer (myself, Tom, 
Marc -- possibly Alvaro) and only one vote against (Bruce). Does anyone 
think we ought to ask for opinions on -hackers? If not, I'll submit a 
doc patch adding the disclaimer to the release notes.

Cheers,

Neil


Wed, 25 Aug 2004 18:34:13 -0400
Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com>
Re: pgsql-server: Update that 8.0 will support MS Win
Neil Conway wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > I think we need to actually find someone who reports a problem before
> > stating something.  I don't see how we can assume it is unstable without
> > some feedback.
> 
> My count is three votes in favour of adding a disclaimer (myself, Tom, 
> Marc -- possibly Alvaro) and only one vote against (Bruce). Does anyone 
> think we ought to ask for opinions on -hackers? If not, I'll submit a 
> doc patch adding the disclaimer to the release notes.

Is the release notes even the right place for it?  When you read the
release notes after 8.1 is released, do you want to read that Win32
had possible problems in 8.0?  Perhaps we should mention it in the
release announcement instead?

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

Wed, 25 Aug 2004 22:47:28 -0400 (EDT)
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
Re: pgsql-server: Update that 8.0 will support MS Win
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> Is the release notes even the right place for it?  When you read the
> release notes after 8.1 is released, do you want to read that Win32
> had possible problems in 8.0?

Sure you do.  The release notes are historical material.  There is
plenty of stuff in there that's totally irrelevant now, but we have
not (and I trust will not) gone back and removed entries that are no
longer significant.

> Perhaps we should mention it in the
> release announcement instead?

Why are you so insistent on sweeping this point under the rug?  I'd much
rather underpromise and overdeliver than the reverse.  We have plenty of
reason to be suspicious of the native Windows port at this stage ...
if you think it's going to be problem-free, I refer you to
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2004-08/msg00307.php
for the counterexample du jour.  You'd be nuts to think that we'll find
every one of these issues before 8.0 release.

			regards, tom lane

Wed, 25 Aug 2004 23:07:22 -0400
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: pgsql-server: Update that 8.0 will support MS Win 
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> > Is the release notes even the right place for it?  When you read the
> > release notes after 8.1 is released, do you want to read that Win32
> > had possible problems in 8.0?
> 
> Sure you do.  The release notes are historical material.  There is
> plenty of stuff in there that's totally irrelevant now, but we have
> not (and I trust will not) gone back and removed entries that are no
> longer significant.
> 
> > Perhaps we should mention it in the
> > release announcement instead?
> 
> Why are you so insistent on sweeping this point under the rug?  I'd much
> rather underpromise and overdeliver than the reverse.  We have plenty of
> reason to be suspicious of the native Windows port at this stage ...
> if you think it's going to be problem-free, I refer you to
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-bugs/2004-08/msg00307.php
> for the counterexample du jour.  You'd be nuts to think that we'll find
> every one of these issues before 8.0 release.

Agreed, but we just found NT problems today too.  The only argument I
can accept is that somehow platform bugs are harder to discover than our
other code bugs.

My concern is that I would like to have some actual facts before making
statements.  I am not good on going on guesses, I guess. :-)

The open Win32 bugs have been there for quite some time, though the one
you quote is quite new so maybe platforms bugs are harder to find.

This is the same issue I had with removing NT4 as supported.  I needed
to hear facts about what didn't work before making a statement because
when I go on guesses, I am usually wrong and have to somehow take it
back, and in this project, it is hard to retract things effectively.

As an example of the NT4 issue, it turns out it works just fine, just
that it doesn't support tablespaces, and the installer doesn't work. 
Once I had that info I could adjust the release notes to just not
mention it in the list of platforms.

What text are people suggesting?  "This is a new port and might have
bugs that will be fixed in minor releases?" Or, "This port is
experimental and you would be crazy to use it in production"?  :-)


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

Thu, 26 Aug 2004 00:03:34 -0400 (EDT)
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
Re: pgsql-server: Update that 8.0 will support MS Win
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> Agreed, but we just found NT problems today too.  The only argument I
> can accept is that somehow platform bugs are harder to discover than our
> other code bugs.

The point isn't that they're harder to discover or not, it's that they
are new.  8.0 as a whole will have plenty of bugs that we will not find
till after release :-( (not happy about that statement, but it's a fact).
But we can be pretty certain that most of the bugs affecting Unix
platforms will be generic cross-platform bugs that also fail on the
Windows port.  On *top* of those issues, the Windows port will have its
own problems.  It's the merest wishful thinking to suppose that the
Windows port will be as stable as the longer-established ports.  I do
not say that it won't or can't get there ... but I do say that it won't
happen on day zero, and we ought to be forthright about admitting that.

> My concern is that I would like to have some actual facts before making
> statements.  I am not good on going on guesses, I guess. :-)

Wake up and smell the flowers, Bruce.  There is plenty of evidence for
my position already in the pgsql-bugs archives, including the latest
item that I pointed you to just up-thread.  You are being deliberately
clueless.

> What text are people suggesting?  "This is a new port and might have
> bugs that will be fixed in minor releases?" Or, "This port is
> experimental and you would be crazy to use it in production"?  :-)

I'd go for (b) ;-) ... but then again I think anyone would be crazy to
use Windows for production anytime ;-).  But whatever your opinion on
that, it would be irresponsible not to point out that this is a new port
that is certain to have more than its share of problems.

			regards, tom lane

Thu, 26 Aug 2004 00:51:57 -0400
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: pgsql-server: Update that 8.0 will support MS Win 
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> What text are people suggesting?

How do people feel about the attached doc patch?

Cheers,

Neil
Thu, 26 Aug 2004 01:48:44 -0400
Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com>
Re: pgsql-server: Update that 8.0 will support MS Win

I have shortened your paragraph to:

        Because Win32 is significantly different from the Unix platforms
        supported in previous releases, this port might have more bugs
	than other supported platforms in this release.   Please
	test it thoroughly before using it in production.

and made the change in release.sgml.  Do we need more?

Other wording I considered was:

  "we expect this port not to be as bug-free as other supported platforms"

but that is close to a double-negative.

In adding this now, I would also like to see a notice in a future
release at the point we think Win32 is as bug-free as Unix (or as
bug-free as the platform allows).  (And this might happen in a minor
8.0.X release.)

Again, my concern about this stuff is that you later have to undo what
you said.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Neil Conway wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > What text are people suggesting?
> 
> How do people feel about the attached doc patch?
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Neil
> 

> Index: doc/src/sgml/release.sgml
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /Users/neilc/local/cvs/pgsql-server/doc/src/sgml/release.sgml,v
> retrieving revision 1.288
> diff -c -r1.288 release.sgml
> *** doc/src/sgml/release.sgml	24 Aug 2004 00:06:50 -0000	1.288
> --- doc/src/sgml/release.sgml	26 Aug 2004 05:43:32 -0000
> ***************
> *** 28,47 ****
>         <listitem>
>          <para>
>           This is the first <productname>PostgreSQL</productname>
> !         release to natively run on Microsoft Windows as a server. It
> !         can run as a Windows service. This release supports NT-based
> !         Windows releases like Win2000, XP, Win2003.  Older releases
> !         like Windows 95, 98, and ME are not supported because these
> !         operating systems do not have the infrastructure to support
> !         <productname>PostgreSQL</productname>.  A separate installer
> !         project has been created to ease installation on Windows:
>           <ulink url="http://pgfoundry.org/projects/pginstaller">
>           http://pgfoundry.org/projects/pginstaller</ulink>.
>          </para>
> !        <para>
> !         Previous releases required the Unix emulation toolkit Cygwin for
> !         Win32 server support. <productname>PostgreSQL</productname>
> !         has always supported clients on Win32.
>          </para>
>         </listitem>
>        </varlistentry>
> --- 28,65 ----
>         <listitem>
>          <para>
>           This is the first <productname>PostgreSQL</productname>
> !         release to natively run on Microsoft Windows as a server. This
> !         release supports Windows 2000, XP, and 2003. Older releases of
> !         Windows are not supported because they lack the infrastructure
> !         necessary to support <productname>PostgreSQL</productname>. A
> !         separate installer project has been created to allow for easy
> !         installation on Windows:
>           <ulink url="http://pgfoundry.org/projects/pginstaller">
>           http://pgfoundry.org/projects/pginstaller</ulink>.
>          </para>
> ! 
> !        <warning>
> !         <para>
> !          This is the first release of <productname>PostgreSQL</> to
> !          natively support Win32. As a result, the Windows port of
> !          <productname>PostgreSQL</> is less mature and likely less
> !          stable than <productname>PostgreSQL</> on Unix. While we have
> !          done our best to produce a high-quality release for Windows,
> !          users accustomed to the stability and maturity of
> !          <productname>PostgreSQL</> on Unix may not be satisfied by
> !          the current state of <productname>PostgreSQL</> on
> !          Windows. We expect the maturity of the Windows port to
> !          significantly increase in the future. We encourage all
> !          prospective users of <productname>PostgreSQL</> on Windows to
> !          carefully evaluate the database system before putting it into
> !          production use.
> !         </para>
> !        </warning>
> ! 
> !        <para>
> !         Previous releases required the Unix emulation toolkit Cygwin
> !         for Win32 server support. <productname>PostgreSQL</> has
> !         supported clients on Win32 for a long time.
>          </para>
>         </listitem>
>        </varlistentry>

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

Thu, 26 Aug 2004 09:05:29 -0400 (EDT)
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
Win32 release warning


Bruce Momjian wrote:

>I have shortened your paragraph to:
>
>        Because Win32 is significantly different from the Unix platforms
>        supported in previous releases, this port might have more bugs
>	than other supported platforms in this release.   Please
>	test it thoroughly before using it in production.
>
>and made the change in release.sgml.  Do we need more?
>
>  
>

I don't much like "might have more bugs". Perhaps "might be less robust" 
or "might be less stable"?

cheers

andrew

Thu, 26 Aug 2004 09:24:29 -0400
Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
Re: Win32 release warning
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> 
> 
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> 
>> I have shortened your paragraph to:
>>
>>        Because Win32 is significantly different from the Unix platforms
>>        supported in previous releases, this port might have more bugs
>>     than other supported platforms in this release.   Please
>>     test it thoroughly before using it in production.
>>
>> and made the change in release.sgml.  Do we need more?
>>
>>  
>>
> 
> I don't much like "might have more bugs". Perhaps "might be less robust" 
> or "might be less stable"?

"lacks the extended testing"? Or even "we don't have an extended 
track-record on this platform".

-- 
   Richard Huxton
   Archonet Ltd

Thu, 26 Aug 2004 14:35:02 +0100
Richard Huxton <dev@archonet.com>
Re: Win32 release warning
On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Richard Huxton wrote:

> "lacks the extended testing"?

That's good. We don't need to focus on bugs. The word bug and postgresql 
should never occur in the same sentence... hmm...

-- 
/Dennis Bjï¿½rklund


Thu, 26 Aug 2004 15:39:32 +0200 (CEST)
Dennis Bjorklund <db@zigo.dhs.org>
Re: Win32 release warning

OK, new wording:

        Because Win32 is significantly different from the Unix platforms
        supported in previous releases, it has not been tested as
        extensively as other supported platforms in this release. Please
        test it thoroughly before using it in production.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dennis Bjorklund wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Richard Huxton wrote:
> 
> > "lacks the extended testing"?
> 
> That's good. We don't need to focus on bugs. The word bug and postgresql 
> should never occur in the same sentence... hmm...
> 
> -- 
> /Dennis Bj?rklund
> 

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

Thu, 26 Aug 2004 09:44:20 -0400 (EDT)
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
Re: Win32 release warning
After a long battle with technology, andrew@dunslane.net (Andrew Dunstan), an earthling, wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
>>I have shortened your paragraph to:
>>
>>        Because Win32 is significantly different from the Unix platforms
>>        supported in previous releases, this port might have more bugs
>>	than other supported platforms in this release.   Please
>>	test it thoroughly before using it in production.
>>
>>and made the change in release.sgml.  Do we need more?
>
> I don't much like "might have more bugs". Perhaps "might be less
> robust" or "might be less stable"?

How about:

 "We cannot be as confident in its stability as we are for other
  platforms that have been tested and supported across numerous past
  releases."
-- 
(reverse (concatenate 'string "gro.mca" "@" "enworbbc"))
http://cbbrowne.com/info/rdbms.html
Q: What does the function NULL do?
A: The function NULL tests whether or not its argument is NIL or not.  If
   its argument is NIL the value of NULL is NIL.
-- Ken Tracton, Programmer's Guide to Lisp, page 73.

Thu, 26 Aug 2004 11:27:28 -0400
Christopher Browne <cbbrowne@acm.org>
Re: Win32 release warning
That makes it sound as if you didn't do the same level
of testing on *this* release, like it didn't go
through all the tests or something.  

How about "it does not have the extensive testing
history that other supported platforms in this release
have."

Later
Rob
> 
> OK, new wording:
> 
>         Because Win32 is significantly different
> from the Unix platforms
>         supported in previous releases, it has not
> been tested as
>         extensively as other supported platforms in
> this release. Please
>         test it thoroughly before using it in
> production.
> 
> 
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Dennis Bjorklund wrote:
> > On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Richard Huxton wrote:
> > 
> > > "lacks the extended testing"?
> > 
> > That's good. We don't need to focus on bugs. The
> word bug and postgresql 
> > should never occur in the same sentence... hmm...
> > 
> > -- 
> > /Dennis Bj?rklund
> > 
> 
> -- 
>   Bruce Momjian                        | 
> http://candle.pha.pa.us
>   pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610)
> 359-1001
>   +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts
> Road
>   +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown
> Square, Pennsylvania 19073
> 
> ---------------------------(end of
> broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend
> 



		
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush

Thu, 26 Aug 2004 09:13:30 -0700 (PDT)
Rob Butler <crodster2k@yahoo.com>
Re: Win32 release warning
Rob Butler <crodster2k@yahoo.com> writes:
> That makes it sound as if you didn't do the same level
> of testing on *this* release, like it didn't go
> through all the tests or something.  

> How about "it does not have the extensive testing
> history that other supported platforms in this release
> have."

Not bad, but it doesn't make the point that there's a lot of new
platform-specific code for Windows in there.  You want to point
out not only that there's no history, but that there's new code to be
suspicious of.

			regards, tom lane

Thu, 26 Aug 2004 12:26:16 -0400
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: Win32 release warning 
On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Tom Lane wrote:

> Rob Butler <crodster2k@yahoo.com> writes:
>> That makes it sound as if you didn't do the same level
>> of testing on *this* release, like it didn't go
>> through all the tests or something.
>
>> How about "it does not have the extensive testing
>> history that other supported platforms in this release
>> have."
>
> Not bad, but it doesn't make the point that there's a lot of new
> platform-specific code for Windows in there.  You want to point
> out not only that there's no history, but that there's new code to be
> suspicious of.

"Altho tested throughout our release cycle, the Windows port does not have 
the benefit of the years of testing that has gone into the Unix platforms, 
and, as such, should be treated with the same level of caution as you 
would a new product"

----
Marc G. Fournier           Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: scrappy@hub.org           Yahoo!: yscrappy              ICQ: 7615664

Thu, 26 Aug 2004 13:35:35 -0300 (ADT)
"Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@postgresql.org>
Re: Win32 release warning 
Tom Lane wrote:
> Rob Butler <crodster2k@yahoo.com> writes:
> > That makes it sound as if you didn't do the same level
> > of testing on *this* release, like it didn't go
> > through all the tests or something.  
> 
> > How about "it does not have the extensive testing
> > history that other supported platforms in this release
> > have."
> 
> Not bad, but it doesn't make the point that there's a lot of new
> platform-specific code for Windows in there.  You want to point
> out not only that there's no history, but that there's new code to be
> suspicious of.

Agreed, but savepoints probably has more code.  Do we warn about that
too?

I agree there is a disconnect between the initial clause and the testing
part, and mentioning the code actually does fix that, so new wording is:

        Because Win32 is significantly different from the Unix platforms
        supported in previous releases, there is much new Win32-specific
        code that has not been tested extensively. Please test it
        thoroughly before using it in production.

Also, we probably have more beta testers on Win32 than on all Unix
platforms combined, though they might not be testing as thoroughly as
Unix.

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

Thu, 26 Aug 2004 12:53:25 -0400 (EDT)
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] Win32 release warning
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Tom Lane wrote:
> 
> > Rob Butler <crodster2k@yahoo.com> writes:
> >> That makes it sound as if you didn't do the same level
> >> of testing on *this* release, like it didn't go
> >> through all the tests or something.
> >
> >> How about "it does not have the extensive testing
> >> history that other supported platforms in this release
> >> have."
> >
> > Not bad, but it doesn't make the point that there's a lot of new
> > platform-specific code for Windows in there.  You want to point
> > out not only that there's no history, but that there's new code to be
> > suspicious of.
> 
> "Altho tested throughout our release cycle, the Windows port does not have 
> the benefit of the years of testing that has gone into the Unix platforms, 
> and, as such, should be treated with the same level of caution as you 
> would a new product"

Wow, that is good!  Current wording is:

        Because Win32 is significantly different from the Unix platforms
        supported in previous releases, there is much new Win32-specific
        code that has not been tested extensively. Please test it
        thoroughly before using it in production.

Should I change it to Marc's version?

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

Thu, 26 Aug 2004 12:56:22 -0400 (EDT)
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
Re: Win32 release warning
> 
> Also, we probably have more beta testers on Win32 than on all Unix
> platforms combined, though they might not be testing as thoroughly as
> Unix.


Maybe I am just being dense, but isn't this obvious? I mean this is the 
first release of the Win32 code. Anybody who would be willing to put it
in production without extensive testing deserves everything they get.

Then again we are talking about people who willinging use Windows as the 
primary platform. Forget I brought it up.


Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake






> 


-- 
Command Prompt, Inc., home of Mammoth PostgreSQL - S/ODBC and S/JDBC
Postgresql support, programming shared hosting and dedicated hosting.
+1-503-667-4564 - jd@commandprompt.com - http://www.commandprompt.com
Mammoth PostgreSQL Replicator. Integrated Replication for PostgreSQL
Thu, 26 Aug 2004 10:01:01 -0700
"Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>
Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] Win32 release warning
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> > 
> > Also, we probably have more beta testers on Win32 than on all Unix
> > platforms combined, though they might not be testing as thoroughly as
> > Unix.
> 
> 
> Maybe I am just being dense, but isn't this obvious? I mean this is the 
> first release of the Win32 code. Anybody who would be willing to put it
> in production without extensive testing deserves everything they get.
> 
> Then again we are talking about people who willinging use Windows as the 
> primary platform. Forget I brought it up.

I think there is concern that if the Win32 port is buggy that it will
give the project a bad reputation.  It will probably be distributed to
many who have never used PostgreSQL before.

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

Thu, 26 Aug 2004 13:06:34 -0400 (EDT)
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] Win32 release warning


Marc G. Fournier wrote:

> On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Tom Lane wrote:
>
>> Rob Butler <crodster2k@yahoo.com> writes:
>>
>>> That makes it sound as if you didn't do the same level
>>> of testing on *this* release, like it didn't go
>>> through all the tests or something.
>>
>>
>>> How about "it does not have the extensive testing
>>> history that other supported platforms in this release
>>> have."
>>
>>
>> Not bad, but it doesn't make the point that there's a lot of new
>> platform-specific code for Windows in there.  You want to point
>> out not only that there's no history, but that there's new code to be
>> suspicious of.
>
>
> "Altho tested throughout our release cycle, the Windows port does not 
> have the benefit of the years of testing that has gone into the Unix 
> platforms, and, as such, should be treated with the same level of 
> caution as you would a new product"
>
>
Not bad. I think I'd say " ... does not have the benefit of years of use 
in production environments that PostgreSQL has on Unix platforms ..." - 
I agree with Merlin that we shouldn't imply it hasn't been extensively 
tested.

cheers

andrew

Thu, 26 Aug 2004 13:20:42 -0400
Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
Re: Win32 release warning
On Thursday 26 August 2004 12:56, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> > "Altho tested throughout our release cycle, the Windows port does not
> > have the benefit of the years of testing that has gone into the Unix
> > platforms, and, as such, should be treated with the same level of caution
> > as you would a new product"

> Wow, that is good! 
> Should I change it to Marc's version?

As long as 'although' is correctly spelled.... :-)
-- 
Lamar Owen
Director of Information Technology
Pisgah Astronomical Research Institute
1 PARI Drive
Rosman, NC  28772
(828)862-5554
www.pari.edu

Thu, 26 Aug 2004 14:24:02 -0400
Lamar Owen <lowen@pari.edu>
Re: Win32 release warning
On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Lamar Owen wrote:

> On Thursday 26 August 2004 12:56, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> Marc G. Fournier wrote:
>>> "Altho tested throughout our release cycle, the Windows port does not
>>> have the benefit of the years of testing that has gone into the Unix
>>> platforms, and, as such, should be treated with the same level of caution
>>> as you would a new product"
>
>> Wow, that is good!
>> Should I change it to Marc's version?
>
> As long as 'although' is correctly spelled.... :-)

Ya ya, I'm lazy :)

----
Marc G. Fournier           Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: scrappy@hub.org           Yahoo!: yscrappy              ICQ: 7615664

Thu, 26 Aug 2004 15:28:18 -0300 (ADT)
"Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@postgresql.org>
Re: Win32 release warning
On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Bruce Momjian wrote:

> Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>>>
>>> Also, we probably have more beta testers on Win32 than on all Unix
>>> platforms combined, though they might not be testing as thoroughly as
>>> Unix.
>>
>>
>> Maybe I am just being dense, but isn't this obvious? I mean this is the
>> first release of the Win32 code. Anybody who would be willing to put it
>> in production without extensive testing deserves everything they get.
>>
>> Then again we are talking about people who willinging use Windows as the
>> primary platform. Forget I brought it up.
>
> I think there is concern that if the Win32 port is buggy that it will
> give the project a bad reputation.  It will probably be distributed to
> many who have never used PostgreSQL before.

Since I imagine 99.9% of Windows users are going to use pginstaller to 
install it ... has anyone looked into putting a WARNING pop up window as 
part of the install itself?  Or does such already exist?

----
Marc G. Fournier           Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: scrappy@hub.org           Yahoo!: yscrappy              ICQ: 7615664

Thu, 26 Aug 2004 15:31:37 -0300 (ADT)
"Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@postgresql.org>
Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] Win32 release warning

OK, current text suggestion is:
		
	Although tested throughout our release cycle, the Windows port does not
	have the benefit of years of use in production environments that
	PostgreSQL has on Unix platforms and therefore should be treated with
	the same level of caution as you would a new product.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> 
> 
> Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Tom Lane wrote:
> >
> >> Rob Butler <crodster2k@yahoo.com> writes:
> >>
> >>> That makes it sound as if you didn't do the same level
> >>> of testing on *this* release, like it didn't go
> >>> through all the tests or something.
> >>
> >>
> >>> How about "it does not have the extensive testing
> >>> history that other supported platforms in this release
> >>> have."
> >>
> >>
> >> Not bad, but it doesn't make the point that there's a lot of new
> >> platform-specific code for Windows in there.  You want to point
> >> out not only that there's no history, but that there's new code to be
> >> suspicious of.
> >
> >
> > "Altho tested throughout our release cycle, the Windows port does not 
> > have the benefit of the years of testing that has gone into the Unix 
> > platforms, and, as such, should be treated with the same level of 
> > caution as you would a new product"
> >
> >
> Not bad. I think I'd say " ... does not have the benefit of years of use 
> in production environments that PostgreSQL has on Unix platforms ..." - 
> I agree with Merlin that we shouldn't imply it hasn't been extensively 
> tested.
> 
> cheers
> 
> andrew
> 

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

Thu, 26 Aug 2004 14:33:01 -0400 (EDT)
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
Re: Win32 release warning
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> 
> > Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Also, we probably have more beta testers on Win32 than on all Unix
> >>> platforms combined, though they might not be testing as thoroughly as
> >>> Unix.
> >>
> >>
> >> Maybe I am just being dense, but isn't this obvious? I mean this is the
> >> first release of the Win32 code. Anybody who would be willing to put it
> >> in production without extensive testing deserves everything they get.
> >>
> >> Then again we are talking about people who willinging use Windows as the
> >> primary platform. Forget I brought it up.
> >
> > I think there is concern that if the Win32 port is buggy that it will
> > give the project a bad reputation.  It will probably be distributed to
> > many who have never used PostgreSQL before.
> 
> Since I imagine 99.9% of Windows users are going to use pginstaller to 
> install it ... has anyone looked into putting a WARNING pop up window as 
> part of the install itself?  Or does such already exist?

There is already one for the beta.  I don't see a need to add one for
final release.

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

Thu, 26 Aug 2004 14:33:45 -0400 (EDT)
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] Win32 release warning
I'm testing it, with borland WiNXP/c++ builder 6.0 / zeos 6.1.5 / 
postgresql 8.0 win32 beta1

i'm porting some aplications that use as db postgresql 7.2.4 to 8.0 and 
i'm using win32 version to do that port. In future Linux version will be 
used.
For now i'm happy with results. The database have 94 tables, many views 
and functions associated to triggers.

I'd like to know if exists some benchmark tool do postgresql that i can use?

Regards
Luis Rodrigues


Marc G. Fournier wrote:

> On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Tom Lane wrote:
>
>> Rob Butler <crodster2k@yahoo.com> writes:
>>
>>> That makes it sound as if you didn't do the same level
>>> of testing on *this* release, like it didn't go
>>> through all the tests or something.
>>
>>
>>> How about "it does not have the extensive testing
>>> history that other supported platforms in this release
>>> have."
>>
>>
>> Not bad, but it doesn't make the point that there's a lot of new
>> platform-specific code for Windows in there.  You want to point
>> out not only that there's no history, but that there's new code to be
>> suspicious of.
>
>
> "Altho tested throughout our release cycle, the Windows port does not 
> have the benefit of the years of testing that has gone into the Unix 
> platforms, and, as such, should be treated with the same level of 
> caution as you would a new product"
>
> ----
> Marc G. Fournier           Hub.Org Networking Services 
> (http://www.hub.org)
> Email: scrappy@hub.org           Yahoo!: yscrappy              ICQ: 
> 7615664
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to majordomo@postgresql.org




Thu, 26 Aug 2004 19:34:16 +0100
Luis Rodrigues <luis.rodrigues@linux-portugal.org>
Re: [HACKERS] Win32 release warning
On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Bruce Momjian wrote:

> There is already one for the beta.  I don't see a need to add one for 
> final release.

Might be an idea ... if nothing else, something that at least reminds them 
about reporting bugs and where to do so?  I'd hate to see 1000 ppl 
install, 90% see bugs adn never have them reported :(

----
Marc G. Fournier           Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: scrappy@hub.org           Yahoo!: yscrappy              ICQ: 7615664

Thu, 26 Aug 2004 15:38:22 -0300 (ADT)
"Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@postgresql.org>
Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] Win32 release warning
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> 
> > There is already one for the beta.  I don't see a need to add one for 
> > final release.
> 
> Might be an idea ... if nothing else, something that at least reminds them 
> about reporting bugs and where to do so?  I'd hate to see 1000 ppl 
> install, 90% see bugs adn never have them reported :(

Yes, I was thinking of that, and of telling them they may need to
upgrade more frequently than normal 8.0.0 users to fix win32 bugs as we
find them.  In fact, the idea I was thinking of is to have pginstaller
update from current cvs more frequently than we make minor releases as
we have done during beta.  That way, people can get win32 fixes faster. 

Also, maybe we should encourage them to subscribe to announce so we can
announce any Win32 fix releases we might need.  They probably aren't
used to that procedure.

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

Thu, 26 Aug 2004 15:42:35 -0400 (EDT)
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] Win32 release warning
On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Bruce Momjian wrote:

> Marc G. Fournier wrote:
>> On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>>
>>> There is already one for the beta.  I don't see a need to add one for
>>> final release.
>>
>> Might be an idea ... if nothing else, something that at least reminds them
>> about reporting bugs and where to do so?  I'd hate to see 1000 ppl
>> install, 90% see bugs adn never have them reported :(
>
> Yes, I was thinking of that, and of telling them they may need to
> upgrade more frequently than normal 8.0.0 users to fix win32 bugs as we
> find them.  In fact, the idea I was thinking of is to have pginstaller
> update from current cvs more frequently than we make minor releases as
> we have done during beta.  That way, people can get win32 fixes faster.
>
> Also, maybe we should encourage them to subscribe to announce so we can
> announce any Win32 fix releases we might need.  They probably aren't
> used to that procedure.

Having installed enough Windows software over the years (unfortunately), 
how about adding a 'register for annoucements' with a textbox to 
auto-subscribe to the list if they so choose?  Instead of making them go 
through opening their mail reader and having to send off the message ... 
my experience with most Windows users is that 'the least amount of work 
required' means the most likely they will do it :(

----
Marc G. Fournier           Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: scrappy@hub.org           Yahoo!: yscrappy              ICQ: 7615664

Thu, 26 Aug 2004 16:48:00 -0300 (ADT)
"Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@postgresql.org>
Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] Win32 release warning
Bruce Momjian wrote:

> OK, current text suggestion is:
> 		
> 	Although tested throughout our release cycle, the Windows port does not
> 	have the benefit of years of use in production environments that
> 	PostgreSQL has on Unix platforms and therefore should be treated with
> 	the same level of caution as you would a new product.

What about:  ... Unix like platforms ...



Regards
Gaetano Mendola



Fri, 27 Aug 2004 00:20:55 +0200
Gaetano Mendola <mendola@bigfoot.com>
Re: Win32 release warning

OK, release notes updated.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Bruce Momjian wrote:
> 
> OK, current text suggestion is:
> 		
> 	Although tested throughout our release cycle, the Windows port does not
> 	have the benefit of years of use in production environments that
> 	PostgreSQL has on Unix platforms and therefore should be treated with
> 	the same level of caution as you would a new product.
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> > 
> > > On Thu, 26 Aug 2004, Tom Lane wrote:
> > >
> > >> Rob Butler <crodster2k@yahoo.com> writes:
> > >>
> > >>> That makes it sound as if you didn't do the same level
> > >>> of testing on *this* release, like it didn't go
> > >>> through all the tests or something.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>> How about "it does not have the extensive testing
> > >>> history that other supported platforms in this release
> > >>> have."
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Not bad, but it doesn't make the point that there's a lot of new
> > >> platform-specific code for Windows in there.  You want to point
> > >> out not only that there's no history, but that there's new code to be
> > >> suspicious of.
> > >
> > >
> > > "Altho tested throughout our release cycle, the Windows port does not 
> > > have the benefit of the years of testing that has gone into the Unix 
> > > platforms, and, as such, should be treated with the same level of 
> > > caution as you would a new product"
> > >
> > >
> > Not bad. I think I'd say " ... does not have the benefit of years of use 
> > in production environments that PostgreSQL has on Unix platforms ..." - 
> > I agree with Merlin that we shouldn't imply it hasn't been extensively 
> > tested.
> > 
> > cheers
> > 
> > andrew
> > 
> 
> -- 
>   Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
>   pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 359-1001
>   +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
>   +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
> 
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
> 

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

Thu, 26 Aug 2004 22:08:59 -0400 (EDT)
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] Win32 release warning
On Wed, 25 Aug 2004, Bruce Momjian wrote:

> Neil Conway wrote:
>> Bruce Momjian wrote:
>>> I think we need to actually find someone who reports a problem before
>>> stating something.  I don't see how we can assume it is unstable without
>>> some feedback.
>>
>> My count is three votes in favour of adding a disclaimer (myself, Tom,
>> Marc -- possibly Alvaro) and only one vote against (Bruce). Does anyone
>> think we ought to ask for opinions on -hackers? If not, I'll submit a
>> doc patch adding the disclaimer to the release notes.
>
> Is the release notes even the right place for it?  When you read the
> release notes after 8.1 is released, do you want to read that Win32
> had possible problems in 8.0?  Perhaps we should mention it in the
> release announcement instead?

When is the last time you saw a Windows read release notes?  I personally 
don't think its near obvious enough :(

----
Marc G. Fournier           Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: scrappy@hub.org           Yahoo!: yscrappy              ICQ: 7615664

Sat, 28 Aug 2004 23:47:34 -0300 (ADT)
"Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@postgresql.org>
Re: pgsql-server: Update that 8.0 will support MS Win