Re: Time to scale up?

On Tue, 25 Jul 2006, Paul Ramsey wrote:

> Josh Berkus wrote:
>> Thomas Hallgren wrote:
>>>  A user would probably rather see criterion's like
>>> feature richness and standards conformant. These problems persist
>>> although a number of actors bundle PostgreSQL with various modules
>>> today.
>>
>> What you're talking about is creating a "distribution" of PostgreSQL
>> in  the same way that there are distributions of Linux.
>> Traditionally,  we've left this to commercial distributors, and
>> OS packagers of PostgreSQL to do this.   Other people have
>> explained this strategy on this thread.
>
>
> There is an element of "code centric-ness" in this whole argument which
> inverts the order of operations involved in coming to know and understand a
> project from the outside.
>
> If we want PostgreSQL to "look bigger" from the outside, it is not necessary
> to actually *make* it bigger, "looking" bigger is sufficient.
>
> Imagine a download page that included:
>
> postgresql-database-8.1.4
> postgresql-replication-1.0.2

Which version of Replication do we throw in here?

> postgresql-gis-1.1.3

Is there more then just PostGIS?  Wait, how does that work if we go and
rebrand someone else's project?

> postgresql-pooling-1.0.3

Same as gis ... is there only one pooling(?)?, and, if so, you are again
talking about 'rebranding' someone else's project ...

----
Marc G. Fournier           Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email . scrappy@hub.org                              MSN . scrappy@hub.org
Yahoo . yscrappy               Skype: hub.org        ICQ . 7615664