Re: Patch set under development to add usage reporting. - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Greg Smith
Subject Re: Patch set under development to add usage reporting.
Date
Msg-id alpine.GSO.2.01.0910302130020.15666@westnet.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Patch set under development to add usage reporting.  (John Murtari <jmurtari@thebook.com>)
Responses Re: Patch set under development to add usage reporting.  (John Murtari <jmurtari@thebook.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, 30 Oct 2009, John Murtari wrote:

> We now have a basic patch set that works and is basically stable (not 
> recommended for production servers!).  We've dedicated a page at our web 
> site and it hopefully has answers to most of your questions, and also 
> has the patch set for download.  These are for 7.4.19 - the version 
> included with RHEL 4.

This is kind of interesting, but targeting 7.4.19 isn't going to get you 
very far toward code anyone else will use.  That release is 6 years old, 
it's filled with unsolvable limitations, it's basically at end of life. 
The fact that it's bundled with RHEL4 and there are some legacy installs 
still floating around are the only reason it's not completely gone from 
everyone's radar.

In short, if you actually care about your data, you should be running a 
newer version of the database regardless of what RHEL ships.  And you 
should be building patches against no earlier than 8.4 if you want 
something that has any hope of being accepted into mainstream development. 
Eventually the patch will need to apply to the 8.5 work in progress source 
code tree before it's even a candidate to merge.  You can probably get 
away with developing against a more stable version like 8.4.1, if you must 
target something people can also deploy, but even that's not ideal and 
will eventually turn into a code merge hurdle.

--
* Greg Smith gsmith@gregsmith.com http://www.gregsmith.com Baltimore, MD


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Jeff Janes
Date:
Subject: Re: Making hash indexes worthwhile
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Making hash indexes worthwhile