| From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Sergey Konoplev <gray(dot)ru(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Any reasons to not move pgstattuple to core? |
| Date: | 2013-10-03 22:55:45 |
| Message-ID: | CAM3SWZTtkUzJjm4pTmSmL-0W_RhvBPuEGPRQDaEgbHSDh==2pA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 3:34 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Well, this is a general problem with any extension - somebody might
> want it on a system on which the admin is unable or unwilling to
> install it. But we can't put every possible extension in core.
The flip-side is that we could have made an awful lot of built-in
things extensions, but for whatever reason chose not to. I'm not
necessarily in favor of putting pgstattuple in core, but the question
should be asked: Why should we do this here? In what way is
pgstattuple like or not like the other things that are in core?
--
Peter Geoghegan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Sergey Konoplev | 2013-10-03 23:47:10 | Re: Any reasons to not move pgstattuple to core? |
| Previous Message | Kevin Hale Boyes | 2013-10-03 22:38:52 | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Add DISCARD SEQUENCES command. |