Re: Call for 7.5 feature completion - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Hans-Jürgen Schönig
Subject Re: Call for 7.5 feature completion
Date
Msg-id 40A86598.5020301@cybertec.at
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Call for 7.5 feature completion  ("Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@postgresql.org>)
Responses Re: Call for 7.5 feature completion  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
Re: Call for 7.5 feature completion  (Jan Wieck <JanWieck@Yahoo.com>)
Re: Call for 7.5 feature completion  (Mario Weilguni <mweilguni@sime.com>)
Re: Call for 7.5 feature completion  (Gaetano Mendola <mendola@bigfoot.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> On Mon, 17 May 2004, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> 
> 
>>Marc G. Fournier wrote:
>>
>>>>Agreed, but you are a "me too", not a huge percentage of our userbase.
>>>
>>>How do you know?  Have you polled our complete userbase?
>>>
>>>
>>>>Basically, after 6-7 months of development, I want more than a vacuum
>>>>patch and a new cache replacement policy.  I want something big, in
>>>>fact, several big things.
>>>
>>>Most likely won't happen, since what is considered big by you isn't
>>>necessarily what is considered big by someone else ... as Hannu, and I
>>>believe, Jan, have so far pointed out to you ...
>>
>>I can't poll for everything.  I make my own educated guesses.
> 
> 
> Based on what though?
> 
> All the clients that I deal with on a daily basis generally care about is
> performance ... that is generally what they upgrade for ... so, my
> 'educated guess' based on real world users is that Win32, PITR and nested
> transactions are not important ... tablespaces, I have one client that has
> asked about something *similar* to it, but tablespaces, for him, doesn't
> come close to what they would like to see ...
> 
> So, my 'educated guess' is different then yours is ... does that make
> yours wrong?  Nope ... just means we have different sample sets to work
> with ...
>


Interesting.
We have made COMPLETELY different experiences.

There is one question people ask me daily: "When can we have sychronous 
replication and PITR?".
Performance is not a problem here. People are more interested in 
stability and "enterprise" features such as those I have mentioned above.

I am still wondering about two things:
Somebody has posted a 2PC patch - I haven't seen too many comments
Somebody has posted sync multimaster replication (PgCluster) - nobody 
has commented on that. Maybe I am the only one who has ever tried it ...

Most likely this is not very encourageing for the developers involved ...
Regards,
    Hans


-- 
Cybertec Geschwinde u Schoenig
Schoengrabern 134, A-2020 Hollabrunn, Austria
Tel: +43/720/10 1234567 or +43/664/233 90 75
www.cybertec.at, www.postgresql.at, kernel.cybertec.at



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: James William Pye
Date:
Subject: Clean-up callbacks for non-SR functions
Next
From: Marko Karppinen
Date:
Subject: Re: Rough draft for Unicode-aware UPPER()/LOWER()/INITCAP()