Re: PGXLOG variable worthwhile?

From: Curt Sampson <cjs(at)cynic(dot)net>
To: Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)fourpalms(dot)org>
Cc: Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>, Justin Clift <justin(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Hackers Mailing List <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: PGXLOG variable worthwhile?
Date: 2002-09-21 04:16:42
Message-ID: Pine.NEB.4.44.0209211312060.1940-100000@angelic.cynic.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, 20 Sep 2002, Thomas Lockhart wrote:

> Well, what I was hoping for, but no longer expect, is that features
> (store xlog in another area) can be implemented and applied without
> rejection by the new gatekeepers.

It can be, and very simply. So long as you do it in the way which
is not error-prone, rather than the way which is.

> I have no fundamental objection to extending and replacing
> implementation features as positive contributions to development. I do
> have trouble with folks rejecting features without understanding the
> issues, and sorry, there was a strong thread of "why would anyone want
> to put storage on another device" to the discussion.

I doubt it. There was perhaps a strong thread of "windows users
are loosers," but certainly Unix folks put storage on another device
all the time, using symlinks. This was mentioned many, many times.

> There has been a fundamental shift in the quality and civility of
> discussions over issues over the last couple of years, and I was naively
> hoping that we could work through that on this topic. Not happening, and
> not likely too.

Well, when you're going to bring in Windows in a pretty heavily
open-source-oriented group, no, it's not likely you're going to bring
everyone together. (This is not a value judgement, it's just a, "Hello,
this is the usenet (or something similar)," observation.

That said, again, I don't think anybody was objecting to what you
wanted to do. It was simply a bad implementation that I, and probably
all the others, were objecting to. So please don't go on like we didn't
like the concept.

cjs
--
Curt Sampson <cjs(at)cynic(dot)net> +81 90 7737 2974 http://www.netbsd.org
Don't you know, in this new Dark Age, we're all light. --XTC

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Pete St. Onge 2002-09-21 05:54:55 Hosed PostGreSQL Installation
Previous Message Tatsuo Ishii 2002-09-21 00:39:58 Re: Conversion Questions