Re: PostgreSQL Audit Extension

On 02/03/2016 10:36 AM, Robert Haas wrote:

>>>> I'll be the first to admit that the design is not the prettiest.  Trying
>>> It's entirely reasonable for the community NOT to want to
>>> privilege one implementation over another.
>>
>> This, not so much.
>
> No, this is ABSOLUTELY critical.  Suppose EnterpriseDB writes an
> auditing solution, 2ndQuadrant writes an auditing solution, and Cruncy
> Data writes an auditing solution, and the community then picks one of
> those to put in core.  Do you not think that the other two companies
> will feel like they got the fuzzy end of the lollipop?  The only time
> this sort of thing doesn't provoke hard feelings is when everybody
> agrees that the solution that was finally adopted was way better than
> the competing things.  If you don't think this is a problem, I
> respectfully suggest that you haven't seen enough of these situations
> play out.
>

I am on the fence with this one because we should not care about what a 
company feels, period. We are not a business, we are not an employer. We 
are a community of people not companies.

On the other hand, I do very much understand what you are saying here 
and it is a difficult line to walk.

Then on the third hand (for those of us that were cloned and have 
issues), those companies chose PostgreSQL as their base, that is *their* 
problem, not ours. We also have to be considerate of the fact that those 
companies to contribute a lot to the community.

In short, may the best solution for the community win. Period.

Sincerely,

JD

-- 
Command Prompt, Inc.                  http://the.postgres.company/                        +1-503-667-4564
PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development.
Everyone appreciates your honesty, until you are honest with them.