Merlin Moncure wrote:
> On 1/23/09, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> Right at the moment I'm wondering why we are going to change the code
>> now to support a ten-year-old OS version that evidently no one has tried
>> to use Postgres on before.
>
> I'd like to address this observation. You may have noticed that eSilo
> has been contributing a number of patches to Postgres involving legacy
> systems. Understandably, there is very little overlap between modern
> versions of Postgres and these aging unixen. However, quite a few of
> these systems are still in production serving legacy applications.
>
> eSilo provides backup software. Based on customer feedback we came up
> with a list of systems that are under-represented by current backup
> solutions in the industry . For various reasons, we decided to
> involve libpq in our backup client and market aggressively to
> platforms for which there are very few backup options. libpq is quite
> portable, but there are a few understandable nits that have popped up
> here and there over time for older systems. We are providing fixes
> for those nits to the community.
>
> merlin
>
I will add that its not our hobby to find obscure libpq and/or platform
bugs on fossil machines. Actually, its a rather horrible and
frustrating task. We simply have some unusual requirements for our new
product. What we found amazing is how many requests we get for these
old systems. We are just painfully filling that need.
--
Andrew Chernow
eSilo, LLC
every bit counts
http://www.esilo.com/