Re: [CORE] RC1 blocker issues - Mailing list pgsql-hackers
From | David Fetter |
---|---|
Subject | Re: [CORE] RC1 blocker issues |
Date | |
Msg-id | 20061127212040.GU722@fetter.org Whole thread Raw |
In response to | Re: [CORE] RC1 blocker issues ("Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>) |
Responses |
Re: [CORE] RC1 blocker issues
|
List | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Nov 26, 2006 at 08:42:26PM -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > Tom Lane wrote: > >"Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> writes: > >Nobody has a use-case for INSERT RETURNING, such as wanting to > >fetch the value assigned to a serial column? > > currval()? lastval()? INSERT ... RETURNING can return a rowset, not just one particular part of one particular row. > > Nobody has a use for CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY?' > > Of course they do, again need not want. CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY is > a great feature but it isn't something that is whiz, bang, pow (such > as the enormous performance increase between 7.4/8.0 and 8.1). > > Our most active customers, even those with many hundreds of millions > of rows per table, can create an index reasonably quick based on the > hardware they run. They just schedule it to run after hours or on > off peak. All that needs to happen is for this to take 49 hours. Suddenly, there's a use case ;) > >Nobody needs an order-of-magnitude speedup in large sorts? > >Nobody's hit a context swap storm that might be fixed by 8.2? I > >could go on like this for awhile. > > Don't take it personally Tom, I wasn't knocking the hard work. I was > simply stating what I see, which is 8.1 is pretty darn good. It > should be considered a compliment. > > Of course every feature in 8.2 is appreciated, but that doesn't mean > I have customers clamoring for them. I am just now getting most of > our customers to move to 8.1. I still have many customers on 7.3. That's a big problem for both you and your customers. At some point in the not too distant future, 7.3 will get EOLed. > Just because something *can* do something, doesn't mean that > customers *need* it to do so. There are certainly many > users/customers that will benefit from 8.2 but many of my customers > will never even install it. > > If I tell a customer 8.2 is out and we get these great features and > then I saw, but 8.3 is less than 9 months away. You can kiss the > upgrade to 8.2 goodbye. > > Especially since many of my customers are now running multi-hundred > gigabyte databases. They need a serious reason to upgrade because it > will be a long outage. The performance and feature gains from 8.1 to 8.2 are fairly easy to justify on this scale. > >>However I know that a lot of people are trying to do *alot* of work for > >>8.3. I have had conversations with several individuals who want: > > > >>Recursive queries > >>Multi table indexes > >>GROUP BY/WITH > >>Further HOT Standby Work > > > >>These all seem like pretty big projects to do with a short > >>lifecycle? > > > >Indeed, and if not one of them appears in 8.3, I won't be very > >surprised nor shed any tear. The point of the short 8.3 dev cycle > >is (a) to try to align ourselves with a better time of year for > >beta/release cycle, and (b) to push out several big improvements > >that are already nearly done but missed 8.2, such as bitmap > >indexes. Any other big projects that can be done by March will be > >nice gravy, but they aren't going to get to dictate the schedule. > > Which pushes them to 8.4 potentially, which makes things even more > interesting because what I list above, is what *my* customers want > and have wanted for a long time (and yes, I tell them the same thing > everytime... any time you want to cough up some money, I will put > developers on it :)). Have any of them gotten close to doing this? What approaches have you tried? Cheers, D -- David Fetter <david@fetter.org> http://fetter.org/ phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Skype: davidfetter Remember to vote!
pgsql-hackers by date: