Re: Commercial support, was Re: [HACKERS] v6.4.3 ?
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Commercial support, was Re: [HACKERS] v6.4.3 ? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 17011.918493009@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | RE: Commercial support, was Re: [HACKERS] v6.4.3 ? (Dan Gowin <DGowin@avantec.net>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Dan Gowin <DGowin@avantec.net> writes: > What does all of this mean. Well, Oracle (Commercial) > database packages have some of these same problems that plague > PostgreSQL. The only difference is they are less frequent and > are generally tied to the development cycle. I tend to think > of this as a evolution cycle and Postgres's cycle is on > steroids. That it is. I think most people see rapid release cycles as part of the success story for open-source software, so I'm not eager to try to slow down the cycle. But we do need to consider that many users of Postgres will be more concerned about stability and reliability than having the latest whizzy features. Making a commitment to maintain the prior major release as well as the current one seems like a good answer. I see a number of different specific issues that are getting lumped together under the notion of "commercial support": 1. Personal attention to a particular installation, guaranteed response to a problem, etc. These are things that can and should be handled by a distributed network of support consultants as Terry was suggesting. 2. Bug fixing and feature additions in the supported product. (This is different from "support" in the sense of correcting an admin's mistake, figuring out a workaround, or otherwise supporting a specific installation. I'm thinking about changes that require developer-grade understanding of the code.) I don't really think we need to do anything differently here, other than have a higher level of effort on back-patching prior releases. Like most open-source projects we are far *better* than commercial practice in this area. 3. Commercial guarantees/warrantees/indemnifications, ie, someone pays you money if the thing doesn't work for you. I don't think this is going to happen, at least not for the core Postgres development. Who in their right mind would warrantee something they didn't have 100% control over? If there's really a demand for it then probably companies will offer packages based on back-rev Postgres releases that they have tested like mad and hired a few programmers specifically to fix bugs in. (They'd probably want to put it on a back-rev OS, too...) We should try to encourage qualified people to become support consultants to deal with point #1. I don't think this group can or should do anything about #3 though --- that looks like a splinter project to me. I don't mind someone else taking it up, but it would be a distraction from the core development project for us. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: