On 04/10/2016 04:23 PM, Jim Nasby wrote:
>> From that:
>>
>> * SQL compliant identifiers
>> * Remove RULEs
>> * Change recovery.conf
>> * Change block headers
>> * Retire template0, template1
>> * Optimise FSM
>> * Add heap metapage
>> * Alter tuple headers
>
[snip]
>
> I've tried (unsuccessfully) 3 times now to write an email starting that
> discussion. I think this is an important topic that needs to be
> discussed, but it's not clear how to even get that ball rolling. Even
> without the inevitable flood of "Have you lost your mind?" type replies,
> I don't that we even have a robust enough process to make an intelligent
> decision. Sure, there could be wiki pages or something about this, but
> those won't move discussion by themselves.
>
> Maybe the first question that needs to be answered is how we can
> actually move the community to an informed decision about this.
>
What is the problem we are trying to solve?
SQL compliant indentifiers? Is there a sizeable user base requesting this?
Remove Rules? Why?
Retire template0, template1? Why?
I think those are the questions we need answered. Having a list of what
might be done in the future to break compatibility without a statement
as to the problem they cause or how the process will fix that problem is
basically hand waiving.
(note there are a couple that are obvious, heap metapage, optimise FSM
etc...)
Sincerely,
JD
--
Command Prompt, Inc. http://the.postgres.company/
+1-503-667-4564
PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development.
Everyone appreciates your honesty, until you are honest with them.
