Re: 9.6 -> 10.0
От | Joshua D. Drake |
---|---|
Тема | Re: 9.6 -> 10.0 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 56F1887B.2000007@commandprompt.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: 9.6 -> 10.0 (Peter Geoghegan <peter.geoghegan86@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: 9.6 -> 10.0
|
Список | pgsql-advocacy |
On 03/22/2016 10:52 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 10:41 AM, Josh berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote: >> It's important to remember that PR strategy and engineering truth have >> only a passing acquaintance. While we don't want to promote vaporware, >> we do sometimes soft-pedal our own features to our project's detriment. >> In the current atomosphere of VC-funded hype, we'd do a bit better to >> trumpet our accomplishements early and often. > > I see what you mean. > > The question must be asked: What feature *would* meet that "major > version bump" standard? If it's not extensive parallelism, then I > don't know what else it could be. BDR or PgLogical or Native Partitioning or Federation/Sharding. The parallelism is AWESOME! It is also something that I think a lot of users do not consider a major feature as much as a major, "it is about time" (although partitioning probably falls in that too). That is not to take away from Robert's work which is AWESOME. Yes I can say AWESOME a lot. It is just that the feature, is essentially, "We are faster, yet again". 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.
В списке pgsql-advocacy по дате отправления: