On 2013-11-15 09:51:28 -0200, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On 14 November 2013 03:41, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I have gone through the mail chain of this thread and tried to find
> > the different concerns or open ends for this patch.
>
> Not enough. This feature is clearly being suggested as a way to offer
> Postgres in embedded mode for users by a back door.
I think fixing single user mode to work halfway reasonable is enough
justification for the feature. Having to deal with that when solving
critical issues is just embarassing.
> Doing that forces
> us to turn off many of the server's features and we will take a huge
> step backwards in features, testing, maintainability of code and
> wasted community time.
I think the patch as proposed actually reduces maintenance overhead
since we don't have to deal with the strange separate codepaths for
single user mode.
But: I very, very much agree with the other concerns around this. This
should be a patch to fix single user mode, not one to make postgres into
a single process database. It's not, and trying to make it by using
single user mode for it will start to hinder development of normal
postgres because we suddenly need to be concerned about performance and
features in situations where we previously weren't.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
-- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training &
Services