Re: PostgreSQL Auditing - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: PostgreSQL Auditing
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmoZ16N8+smxa81zA7A16=pf_2UiqvhWyj2Ahjt3dgzJwig@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: PostgreSQL Auditing  (David Steele <david@pgmasters.net>)
Responses Re: PostgreSQL Auditing
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 5:16 PM, David Steele <david@pgmasters.net> wrote:
> This sort of confusion is one of the main reasons I pursued inclusion in
> core.

But that's exactly wrong.  When there is not agreement on one code
base over another, that's the time it is most important not to pick
one of them arbitrarily privilege it over the others.  The *only* time
it's appropriate to move something that could just as well as an
extension into core is when (1) we think it's highly likely that users
will want that particular thing rather than some other thing and (2)
we think it's worth the burden of maintaining that code forever.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: [POC] FETCH limited by bytes.
Next
From: curtis.ruck@gmail.com
Date:
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL Auditing