On 07/03/2012 07:13 PM, Reza Taheri wrote:
> Is the PGSQL community willing to invest in a feature that a) has been
> requested by many others already; and b) can make a huge difference in a
> benchmark that can lend substantial credibility to PGSQL performance?
Larger PostgreSQL features usually get built because companies sponsor
their development, they pass review as both useful & correct, and then
get committed. Asking the community to invest in a new feature isn't
quite the right concept. Yes, everyone would like one of the smaller
index representations. I'm sure we can find reviewers willing to look
at such a feature and committers who would also be interested enough to
commit it, on a volunteer basis. But a feature this size isn't going to
spring to life based just on volunteer work. The most useful questions
would be "who would be capable of writing that feature?" and "how can we
get them sponsored to focus on it?" I can tell from your comments yet
what role(s) in that process VMWare wants to take on internally, and
which it's looking for help with. The job of convincing people it's a
useful feature isn't necessary--we know that's true.
--
Greg Smith 2ndQuadrant US greg@2ndQuadrant.com Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services, and 24x7 Support www.2ndQuadrant.com