On 1/26/15 4:45 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 5:21 PM, Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> wrote:
>> I don't disagree with you about any of that. I don't think you disagree
>> with my comment either. What I'm not entirely clear on is how consensus
>> could be reached. Leaving it dormant for the better part of a year
>> certainly doesn't appear to have helped that situation. We've discussed
>> having it be part of the main server and having it be a contrib module
>> and until about a week ago, I had understood that having it in contrib
>> would be preferrable. Based on the recent emails, it appears there's
>> been a shift of preference to having it be in-core, but clearly there's
>> no time left to do that in this release cycle.
>
> Well, I'm not sure that anyone else here agreed with me on that, and
> one person does not a consensus make no matter who it is. The basic
> problem here is that we don't seem to have even two people here who
> agree on how this ought to be done. The basic dynamic here seems to
> be you asking for changes and Abhijit making them but without any real
> confidence, and I don't feel good about that. I'm willing to defer to
> an emerging consensus here when there is one, but what Abhijit likes
> best is not a consensus, and neither is what you like, and neither is
> what I like. What we need is some people agreeing with each other.
BTW, I know that at least earlier versions of EnterpriseDB's version of Postgres (circa 2007) had an auditing feature.
Inever dealt with any customers who were using it when I was there, but perhaps some other folks could shed some light
onwhat customers wanted to see an an auditing feature... (I'm looking at you, Jimbo!)
--
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com