Re: Getting to beta1 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Greg Smith
Subject Re: Getting to beta1
Date
Msg-id 4BA27D1A.2040407@2ndquadrant.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Getting to beta1  ("Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> As usual, the postgresql.conf is entirely too full. We should ship with
> the top 15.

Maybe, but what we should do is ship, and then talk about this again 
when it's appropriate--earlier in the release cycle.  Let me try and cut 
this one off before it generates a bunch of traffic by summarizing where 
this is stuck at.

We started this release with a good plan for pulling off a major 
postgresql.conf trimming effort that I still like a lot ( 
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PgCon_2009_Developer_Meeting#Auto-Tuning 
)  The first step was switching over to a directory-based structure that 
allowed being all things to all people just by selecting which of the 
files provided you put into there.  We really need the things initdb 
touches to go into a separate file, rather than the bloated sample, in a 
way that it's easy to manage; if you just drop files into a directory 
and the server reads them all that's the easiest route.  Extending to 
include the top 15 or whatever other subset people want is easy after that.

Now, that didn't go anywhere in this release due to development focus 
constraints, but I'm willing to take "has what we can advertise as 
built-in replication" as a disappointing but acceptable substitute in 
lieu of that.  (rolls eyes)  I think it will fit nicely into the "9.1 
adds the polish" theme already gathering around the replication features 
being postponed to the next release.

-- 
Greg Smith  2ndQuadrant US  Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
greg@2ndQuadrant.com   www.2ndQuadrant.us



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Greg Smith
Date:
Subject: Re: Ragged latency log data in multi-threaded pgbench
Next
From: "Marc G. Fournier"
Date:
Subject: Re: Getting to beta1