Re: scheduler in core

Tom,

I believe that "in core" may be "installed by default" in case of the
pgAgent or similar solution...

Many big companies does not allow the developers to configure and install
components.... we need to request everthing in 10 copies of forms...

By making it "in core" or "installed by default" means that we have more
chance that the db scheduler would be widely accepted...

And more important... we would not have to check its availability on the
setup and provide an alternate scheduler if the database scheduler is off...

I believe that a database scheduler would allow me to drop 20 thousand lines
of java code in my server...

2010/2/20 Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>

> Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine(at)hi-media(dot)com> writes:
> > Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> writes:
> >> Why not just use pgAgent? It's far more flexible than the design
> >> you've suggested, and already exists.
>
> > What would it take to have it included in core,
>
> I don't think this really makes sense. There's basically no argument
> for having it in core other than "I'm too lazy to install a separate
> package". Unlike the case for autovacuum, there isn't anything an
> in-core implementation could do that an external one doesn't do as well
> or better. So I'm not eager to take on additional maintenance burden
> for such a thing.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
>

--
Lucas