Re: Time to scale up?
От | Paul Ramsey |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Time to scale up? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 44C68EB7.7010507@refractions.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Time to scale up? (Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Time to scale up?
("Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>)
Re: Time to scale up? ("Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@postgresql.org>) Re: Time to scale up? (Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>) |
Список | pgsql-advocacy |
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 postgresql-gis-1.1.3 postgresql-pooling-1.0.3 Hey, the postgresql database has replication, a spatial extension, a connection pooler, and everything! What a slick project! And, hopefully, when I went to the documentation page, I would find a similar split: PostgreSQL Database Documentation PostgreSQL Replication Documentation PostgreSQL GIS Documentation And so on. It does not require rolling a larger distribution, just making all the components available from one place. Perhaps some cajoling, etc, to get the components to follow some documentation standards so that integrated documentation is possible. Maybe some cajoling to get things named in a boring generic way as the examples above. All the bits are there, they don't need to be *put* together, just *presented* together. People can put them together themselves relatively easily, given the right documentation. Paul PS - Which is not to say I am volunteering, it's still more work than just maintaining the core pages, but it is at least largely restricted to web site activities, not code activities.
В списке pgsql-advocacy по дате отправления: