Re: Proposal - Enabling btree_gist by default - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andreas Karlsson
Subject Re: Proposal - Enabling btree_gist by default
Date
Msg-id 2277528b-abe5-4772-86bf-042e3a65fbe9@proxel.se
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Proposal - Enabling btree_gist by default  (Alastair Turner <minion@decodable.me>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 1/8/26 11:14 AM, Alastair Turner wrote:
> I expect the same complication would exist for anything which 
> moved functionality including data types into core. Which reinforces the 
> point for me that extensions and upgrades is the yak that needs to be 
> shaved before a lot of the discussions about where functionality should 
> be maintained can be acted on.
> 
> I'll strip out the preparatory fix for cleaning up search path settings 
> in initdb scripts into a separate thread.
> 
> FWIW, the discussion which led to proposing enabling the extension by 
> default had started off as a discussion of what from the contrib 
> extension world it would be desirable to move into core. Enabling an 
> extension by default (with PL/pgSQL as an almost-precedent) was seen as 
> a preferable alternative because:
>   - It's a less intrusive change (which this thread may have invalidated)
>   - It keeps the relevant extension points and APIs in use by something 
> which goes through CI
>   - By providing that clearer boundary, it may (an admittedly very 
> speculative may) help to scale the maintenance effort horizontally

A not very realistic dream for me would be to move some things (mostly 
the money type) out of core rather than moving moe stuff in to core, but 
given pg_upgrade and OID stability I do not think that is realistic.

Andreas




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Fujii Masao
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_recvlogical: Prevent flushed data from being re-sent after restarting replication
Next
From: Andreas Karlsson
Date:
Subject: Re: New year, new commitfest app improvements