Re: pgvector as standard PostgreSQL feature?

On Wed, Mar 19, 2025 at 3:20 AM Christophe Pettus <xof(at)thebuild(dot)com> wrote:

>
>
> > On Mar 19, 2025, at 07:47, Sebastien Flaesch <sebastien(dot)flaesch(at)4js(dot)com>
> wrote:
> 2. Adding a type to the core distribution (or even to contrib/) creates a
> maintenance burden on the core developers, and that's not something assumed
> lightly. Once a type is in core, it (almost) never can be removed, and the
> more specialized the type and detailed the implementation, the greater the
> risk that the developers who know and care about it won't be available in
> the future. Search the archives for a discussion of the "money" type for
> what happens when a type added to core starts becoming ill-supported... and
> "money" isn't anywhere near as complex as vector functionality.
>
> 3. PostgreSQL is designed to have a rich ecosystem of extensions. The
> ability to add this kind of functionality in an extension is exactly what
> distinguishes PostgreSQL from many other RDBMS systems. There's no burning
> need to add functionality like this to core.
>
> It is true that hosted environments take time to adopt new extensions
> (although AWS RDS has supported pgvector for nearly two years now), but
> that's not in itself a reason to move things into core.
>

Managed offerings are the norm now, so there really is big
difference between core and non-core extension, unless your extension is
popular enough (as pgvector is) to be supported across the major providers
or only requires SQL to deploy. Your point about core is valid, but
there is definitely a squeeze on that is preventing ecosystem expansion,
don't know what the solution is though.

merlin