On 11/14/2011 07:56 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
> So I'm a bit unclear on why most of the optional data types were
> excluded from your list of Core Extensions.
I was aiming for the extensions that seemed uncontroversial for a first
pass here. One of the tests I applied was "do people sometimes need
this module after going into production with their application?" The
very specific problem I was most concerned about eliminating was people
discovering they needed an extension to troubleshoot performance or
corruption issues, only to discover it wasn't available--because they
hadn't installed the postgresql-contrib package. New package
installation can be a giant pain to get onto a production system in some
places, if it wasn't there during QA etc.
All of the data type extensions fail that test. If you need one of
those, you would have discovered that on your development server, and
made sure the contrib package was available on production too. There
very well may be some types that should be rolled into the core
extensions list, but I didn't want arguments over that to block moving
forward with the set I did suggest. We can always move more of them
later, if this general approach is accepted. It only takes about 5
minutes per extension to move them from contrib to src/extension, once
the new directory tree and doc section is there. But I didn't want to
do the work of moving another 15 of them if the whole idea was going to
get shot down.
--
Greg Smith 2ndQuadrant US greg@2ndQuadrant.com Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services, and 24x7 Support www.2ndQuadrant.us