Re: PostgreSQL Auditing - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Jim Nasby
Subject Re: PostgreSQL Auditing
Date
Msg-id 56B10B4B.8030107@BlueTreble.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: PostgreSQL Auditing  ("Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 2/2/16 10:34 AM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>> Auditing is a pretty security/enterprisey-related thing that could do
>> with the "officially considered to of the PostgreSQL project standard
>> and ready for production" rubber-stamp that tends to go along with most
>> end-user/admin-oriented stuff shipped in the tarball.
>
> Which is exactly why I think .Org needs an official "Extensions" project
> which would completely eliminate these arguments. A project team
> explicitly for vetting extensions.

Yeah, it's disappointing that PGXN doesn't seem to have really taken 
off. I'm sure a big part of that is the need for even SQL extensions to 
have server access, but I suspect part of it is because it's a separate 
project.
-- 
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting, Austin TX
Experts in Analytics, Data Architecture and PostgreSQL
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: CK Tan
Date:
Subject: left, right, full sort merge join plan
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Patch: make behavior of all versions of the "isinf" function be similar