On 10 October 2014 19:26, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 02:05:05PM +0100, Thom Brown wrote:
>> On 10 October 2014 13:43, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>> > On 10 October 2014 11:45, Thom Brown <thom@linux.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> To be honest, this all sounds rather flaky.
> My other concern is you must have realized these issues in five seconds
> too, so why didn't you mention them?
Because the problems that you come up with in 5 seconds aren't
necessarily problems. You just think they are, given 5 seconds
thought. I think my first impression of the concept was poor also
though it would be wonderful if I had remembered all of my initial
objections.
I didn't have any problem with Thom's first post, which was helpful in
allowing me to explain the context and details. As I said in reply at
that point, this is not in itself a barrier; other measures are
necessary. The rest of the thread has descended into a massive
misunderstanding of the purpose and role of redaction.
When any of us move too quickly to a value judgement about a new
concept then we're probably missing the point.
All of us will be asked at sometime in the next few years why Postgres
doesn't have redaction. When you get it, post back here please. Or if
you win the argument on it not being useful in any circumstance, post
that here also. I'm not in a rush.
-- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
