Re: Time to scale up?

> I know I brought this up in 'hackers' a week ago. I got no response
> there. I bring it up again here partly because that was the wrong forum
> but also because I feel that the current way to add features to the core
> is less then perfect and needs to be discussed. I feel that a good
> resolution to my concerns is extremely important for the future success
> of a great database. Perhaps everything that I've said so far is
> self-evident and thoroughly debated already. In that case, please excuse
> my rambling and point me in the right direction.

I seriously doubt you are going to see movement in this direction for a
couple of reasons.

1. A good portion of this is already done by outside packagers

2. There are very good reasons why things are done the way they are done

3. PostgreSQL.Org is a database, not a distribution, just as linux is a
kernel not a distribution.

4. In order for this to be, all coders would have to agree to adhere to
PostgreSQL.Org coding conventions. That is pretty much a deal breaker
right there.

5. You seem to miss the point that your argument about plJava wasn't
shot down by core. It was shot down by a LOT of people, of which a
couple are in core.

There are only 7 (I think that's right) members of core.

As for plruby, as far as I can tell the argument is not over yet. Plruby
does not suffer nearly from the same objects that pljava does. Namely it
is written in C. It would need to be cleaned up to adhere to the
guidelines but that is about it.

Joshua D. Drake

>
> Kind Regards,
> Thomas Hallgren
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
> choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
> match
>

--

=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
http://www.commandprompt.com/