Re: Why not install pgstattuple by default?
От | Andrew Dunstan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Why not install pgstattuple by default? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4DC449C3.9080307@dunslane.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Why not install pgstattuple by default? (Christopher Browne <cbbrowne@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Why not install pgstattuple by default?
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 05/06/2011 03:14 PM, Christopher Browne wrote: > On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 2:32 PM, Greg Smith<greg@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >> Christopher Browne wrote: >>> I'm getting "paper cuts" quite a bit these days over the differences >>> between what different packaging systems decide to install. The one >>> *I* get notably bit on, of late, is that I have written code that >>> expects to have pg_config to do some degree of self-discovery, only to >>> find production folk complaining that they only have "psql" available >>> in their environment. >> Given the other improvements in being able to build extensions in 9.1, we >> really should push packagers to move pg_config from the PostgreSQL >> development package into the main one starting in that version. I've gotten >> bit by this plenty of times. > I'm agreeable to that, in general. > > If there's a "server" package and a "client" package, it likely only > fits with the "server" package. On a host where only the "client" is > installed, they won't be able to install extensions, so it's pretty > futile to have it there. I don't agree. It can be useful even there, to see how the libraries are configured, for example. I'd be inclined to bundle it with postgresql-libs or the moral equivalent. cheers andrew
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: