Re: Do we really want to migrate plproxy and citext into PG core distribution?

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Greg Sabino Mullane
Тема Re: Do we really want to migrate plproxy and citext into PG core distribution?
Дата
Msg-id 0057334c721cf5d3253dc2f7ed354abb@biglumber.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Do we really want to migrate plproxy and citext into PG core distribution?  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>)
Ответы Re: Do we really want to migrate plproxy and citext into PG core distribution?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Re: Do we really want to migrate plproxy and citext into PG core distribution?  ("Marko Kreen" <markokr@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: RIPEMD160


> Do you want Tom to
> a) spend a month improving the optimizer
> b) get him to review already working code so we can package things

Actually, if the alternative is having the pieces outside of core where
Tom never sees them, I'd vote for (b), as the optimizer already kicks ass
but having Tom review other code is pretty invaluable.

Code outside of core, is, in reality, less reviewed, less likely to work
well with recent PG versions, and more likely to cause problems. It's also
less likely to be found by people, less likely to be used by people, and
less likely to be included by distros. Not to say that everything should get
shoved into core, of course, but there are strong arguments for both sides.

- --
Greg Sabino Mullane greg@turnstep.com
PGP Key: 0x14964AC8 200807231145
http://biglumber.com/x/web?pk=2529DF6AB8F79407E94445B4BC9B906714964AC8




-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iEYEAREDAAYFAkiHUlgACgkQvJuQZxSWSshURACg2MIfdH0cJOTf75HmuGEzlxo6
OBQAn21sqZ+rBEel1cf2dAIYpoWPHwW5
=Pj7J
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----




В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: pltcl_*mod commands are broken on Solaris 10
Следующее
От: Kenneth Marshall
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [PATCH]-hash index improving