Thread: Should next release by 8.0 (Was: Re: [GENERAL] I am being interviewed by OReilly )

Should next release by 8.0 (Was: Re: [GENERAL] I am being interviewed by OReilly )

From
"Marc G. Fournier"
Date:
On Thu, 4 Jul 2002, Tom Lane wrote:

> You could make a fair argument that the upcoming 7.3 ought to be called
> 8.0, because the addition of schema support will break an awful lot of
> client-side code ;-).  But I doubt we will do that.

Actually, from reading that thread, I started to think along those lines
too ... it is a major change, is there a reason why going to 8.0 on this
one is a bad idea?  I realize that its *only* been 2 years that we've been
in v7.0 ... :)  v7.0 was released back in Mar of 2000 ... so its almost
2.5 years ...

I don't necessarily agree with Bruce's thought that distributed
replication would be the marker, since there is no set path to that right
now, nor is there, I believe, enough knowledge about whether or not bring
such in will affect anyting other then the backend itself ...

With this next release, we are looking at breaking the front-end apps, as
I understand it ... I think that's pretty drastic of a change to force
going to 8.0 ...

We don't release fast, or often, so our v7.2 is like some other projects
v7.26, at the rate some of them release ...

I'd like to see this next release go to 8.0 ...





Re: Should next release by 8.0

From
"Christopher Kings-Lynne"
Date:
> With this next release, we are looking at breaking the front-end apps, as
> I understand it ... I think that's pretty drastic of a change to force
> going to 8.0 ...
> 
> We don't release fast, or often, so our v7.2 is like some other projects
> v7.26, at the rate some of them release ...
> 
> I'd like to see this next release go to 8.0 ...

Hmmm...makes sense.  I'd be for it.

BTW - has anyone looked at Neil's PREPARE patch yet?

Chris





Re: Should next release by 8.0 (Was: Re: [GENERAL] I am being

From
Justin Clift
Date:
"Marc G. Fournier" wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 4 Jul 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> 
<snip>

We can also go any number in between... like "7.5"...

:)

Regards and best wishes,

Justin Clift


> I'd like to see this next release go to 8.0 ...
> 
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

-- 
"My grandfather once told me that there are two kinds of people: those
who work and those who take the credit. He told me to try to be in the
first group; there was less competition there."  - Indira Gandhi




Re: Should next release by 8.0 (Was: Re: [GENERAL] I am

From
Curt Sampson
Date:
While there are big changes between 7.2 and the next release, they
aren't really any bigger than others during the 7.x series. I don't
really feel that the next release is worth an 8.0 rather than a 7.3. But
this is just an opinion; it's not something I'm prepared to argue about.

cjs
-- 
Curt Sampson  <cjs@cynic.net>   +81 90 7737 2974   http://www.netbsd.org   Don't you know, in this new Dark Age, we're
alllight.  --XTC
 





Re: Should next release by 8.0 (Was: Re: [GENERAL] I am

From
Alessio Bragadini
Date:
In my book, schema support is a big thing, leading to rethink a lot of
database organization and such. PostgreSQL 8 would stress this
importance.

-- 
Alessio F. Bragadini        alessio@albourne.com
APL Financial Services        http://village.albourne.com
Nicosia, Cyprus             phone: +357-22-755750

"It is more complicated than you think"    -- The Eighth Networking Truth from RFC 1925





Re: Should next release by 8.0 (Was: Re: [GENERAL] I am

From
"Marc G. Fournier"
Date:
On Fri, 5 Jul 2002, Curt Sampson wrote:

>
> While there are big changes between 7.2 and the next release, they
> aren't really any bigger than others during the 7.x series. I don't
> really feel that the next release is worth an 8.0 rather than a 7.3. But
> this is just an opinion; it's not something I'm prepared to argue about.

Actually, the "big" change is such that will, at least as far as I'm
understanding it, break pretty much every front-end applicaiton ... which,
I'm guessing, is pretty major, no? :)






"Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@hub.org> writes:
> Actually, the "big" change is such that will, at least as far as I'm
> understanding it, break pretty much every front-end applicaiton ...

Only those that inspect system catalogs --- I'm not sure what percentage
that is, but surely it's not "pretty much every" one.  psql for example
is only affected because of its \d commands.
        regards, tom lane




Re: Should next release by 8.0 (Was: Re: [GENERAL] I am

From
"Marc G. Fournier"
Date:
On Fri, 5 Jul 2002, Tom Lane wrote:

> "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@hub.org> writes:
> > Actually, the "big" change is such that will, at least as far as I'm
> > understanding it, break pretty much every front-end applicaiton ...
>
> Only those that inspect system catalogs --- I'm not sure what percentage
> that is, but surely it's not "pretty much every" one.  psql for example
> is only affected because of its \d commands.

Okay, anyone have any ideas of other packages that would inspect the
system catalog?  The only ones I could think of, off the top of my head,
would be pgAccess, pgAdmin and phpPgAdmin ... but I would guess that any
'administratively oriented' interface would face similar problems, no?







Re: Should next release by 8.0 (Was: Re: [GENERAL] I am

From
Thomas Lockhart
Date:
> Actually, the "big" change is such that will, at least as far as I'm
> understanding it, break pretty much every front-end applicaiton ... which,
> I'm guessing, is pretty major, no? :)

I've always thought of our release numbering as having "themes". The 6.x
series took Postgres from interesting but buggy to a solid system, with
a clear path to additional capabilities. The 7.x series fleshes out SQL
standards compliance and rationalizes the O-R features, as well as adds
to robustness and speed with WAL etc. And the 8.x series would enable
Postgres to extend to distributed systems etc., quite likely having some
fundamental restructuring of the way we handle sources of data (remember
our discussions a couple years ago regarding "tuple sources"?).

So I feel that bumping to 8.x just for schemas is not necessary. I
*like* the idea of having more than one or two releases in a series, and
would be very happy to see a 7.3 released.
                  - Thomas




Re: Should next release by 8.0 (Was: Re: [GENERAL] I am

From
"Marc G. Fournier"
Date:
On Fri, 5 Jul 2002, Thomas Lockhart wrote:

> > Actually, the "big" change is such that will, at least as far as I'm
> > understanding it, break pretty much every front-end applicaiton ... which,
> > I'm guessing, is pretty major, no? :)
>
> I've always thought of our release numbering as having "themes". The 6.x
> series took Postgres from interesting but buggy to a solid system, with
> a clear path to additional capabilities. The 7.x series fleshes out SQL
> standards compliance and rationalizes the O-R features, as well as adds
> to robustness and speed with WAL etc. And the 8.x series would enable
> Postgres to extend to distributed systems etc., quite likely having some
> fundamental restructuring of the way we handle sources of data (remember
> our discussions a couple years ago regarding "tuple sources"?).
>
> So I feel that bumping to 8.x just for schemas is not necessary. I
> *like* the idea of having more than one or two releases in a series, and
> would be very happy to see a 7.3 released.

Seems I'm the only one for 8.x, so 7.3 it is :)






Re: Should next release by 8.0 (Was: Re: [GENERAL] I am

From
Bruce Momjian
Date:
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> On Fri, 5 Jul 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> 
> > "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@hub.org> writes:
> > > Actually, the "big" change is such that will, at least as far as I'm
> > > understanding it, break pretty much every front-end applicaiton ...
> >
> > Only those that inspect system catalogs --- I'm not sure what percentage
> > that is, but surely it's not "pretty much every" one.  psql for example
> > is only affected because of its \d commands.
> 
> Okay, anyone have any ideas of other packages that would inspect the
> system catalog?  The only ones I could think of, off the top of my head,
> would be pgAccess, pgAdmin and phpPgAdmin ... but I would guess that any
> 'administratively oriented' interface would face similar problems, no?

That's a good point.  Only the admin stuff is affected, not all
applications.  All applications _can_ now use schemas, but for most
cases applications remain working unchanged.

--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610)
853-3000+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill,
Pennsylvania19026
 




Re: Should next release by 8.0 (Was: Re: [GENERAL] I am

From
"D'Arcy J.M. Cain"
Date:
On July 5, 2002 10:27 am, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> On Fri, 5 Jul 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> > "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@hub.org> writes:
> > > Actually, the "big" change is such that will, at least as far as I'm
> > > understanding it, break pretty much every front-end applicaiton ...
> >
> > Only those that inspect system catalogs --- I'm not sure what percentage
> > that is, but surely it's not "pretty much every" one.  psql for example
> > is only affected because of its \d commands.
>
> Okay, anyone have any ideas of other packages that would inspect the
> system catalog?  The only ones I could think of, off the top of my head,
> would be pgAccess, pgAdmin and phpPgAdmin ... but I would guess that any
> 'administratively oriented' interface would face similar problems, no?

PyGreSQL pokes into the catalogues a bit.

-- 
D'Arcy J.M. Cain <darcy@{druid|vex}.net>   |  Democracy is three wolves
http://www.druid.net/darcy/                |  and a sheep voting on
+1 416 425 1212     (DoD#0082)    (eNTP)   |  what's for dinner.




Re: Should next release by 8.0 (Was: Re: [GENERAL] I am

From
"Sander Steffann"
Date:
Hi!

> I've always thought of our release numbering as having "themes". The 6.x
> series took Postgres from interesting but buggy to a solid system, with
> a clear path to additional capabilities. The 7.x series fleshes out SQL
> standards compliance and rationalizes the O-R features, as well as adds
> to robustness and speed with WAL etc. And the 8.x series would enable
> Postgres to extend to distributed systems etc.

This sounds very good to me. I get the feeling sometimes that software
projects just increase the major version number to 'sound interesting'. I
don't think that PostgreSQL needs that anymore. A modest numbering policy
might even give it a 'stable' feeling...

Sander.