Re: Time to scale up?

On Tue, 25 Jul 2006, Paul Ramsey wrote:

> Josh Berkus wrote:
>> Thomas Hallgren wrote:
>>> A user would probably rather see criterion's like
>>> feature richness and standards conformant. These problems persist
>>> although a number of actors bundle PostgreSQL with various modules
>>> today.
>>
>> What you're talking about is creating a "distribution" of PostgreSQL
>> in the same way that there are distributions of Linux.
>> Traditionally, we've left this to commercial distributors, and
>> OS packagers of PostgreSQL to do this. Other people have
>> explained this strategy on this thread.
>
>
> There is an element of "code centric-ness" in this whole argument which
> inverts the order of operations involved in coming to know and understand a
> project from the outside.
>
> If we want PostgreSQL to "look bigger" from the outside, it is not necessary
> to actually *make* it bigger, "looking" bigger is sufficient.
>
> Imagine a download page that included:
>
> postgresql-database-8.1.4
> postgresql-replication-1.0.2

Which version of Replication do we throw in here?

> postgresql-gis-1.1.3

Is there more then just PostGIS? Wait, how does that work if we go and
rebrand someone else's project?

> postgresql-pooling-1.0.3

Same as gis ... is there only one pooling(?)?, and, if so, you are again
talking about 'rebranding' someone else's project ...

----
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email . scrappy(at)hub(dot)org MSN . scrappy(at)hub(dot)org
Yahoo . yscrappy Skype: hub.org ICQ . 7615664