Alberto, Can you share your thoughts?
Regards Victor El mar, 8 feb 2022 a las 4:19, Aleksandar Vidakovic (< chee...@monkeysintown.com>) escribió: > ... YAML, XML or JSON... all good for me... in the end very easy to > transform with Jackson in a one liner if someone needs a different > format... > > So, have no preference here... let's see what the community has to say... > > Cheers > > On Tue, Feb 8, 2022 at 10:56 AM Arnold Galovics <galovicsarn...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Hi Aleks, >> >> Good to know. >> >> Any preference for YAML versus XML format? >> >> Best, >> Arnold >> >> On Tue, Feb 8, 2022 at 10:43 AM Aleksandar Vidakovic < >> chee...@monkeysintown.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi Arnold, >>> >>> ... personally, I am looking forward to seeing this one happen... >>> Postgres support is one of the things that I hear people requesting more >>> and more often. And having used Liquibase myself in other projects, I have >>> to say that I find it a lot easier to use and much cleaner. One thing that >>> I could create relatively easily based on Liquibase changeset files (in >>> this case I used YAML): I've created a little command line tool with JBang >>> to generate PlantUML ERD diagrams... something that is a lot harder to >>> achieve with plain DDL scripts and Flyway. >>> >>> I agree to include this one after 1.6... that gives us some time to hash >>> out backward compatibility (or not) and figure out how to make the >>> transition as easy as possible for everyone. >>> >>> +1 >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> Aleks >>> >>> On Tue, Feb 8, 2022 at 10:08 AM Arnold Galovics < >>> galovicsarn...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi everyone, >>>> >>>> I was scanning through some tickets and found FINERACT-984 >>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FINERACT-984>: Postgres >>>> support. >>>> >>>> I'm glad this has been brought up already. I thought about some >>>> potential paths forward to support Postgres in Fineract, let me explain. >>>> >>>> First of all, I've gotta say Postgres would be a great addition to the >>>> current Fineract project because - at least from my experience - Postgres >>>> often outperforms MySQL performance-wise. At one of my previous projects - >>>> which was a completely different product from Fineract - we used AWS cloud >>>> to deploy the application and we were planning to use AWS Aurora to boost >>>> the performance but we weren't sure whether AWS Aurora MySQL or Aurora >>>> PostgreSQL is the way to go, so we decided to measure it. Aurora Postgre >>>> was way better than Aurora MySQL in terms of performance but I can't really >>>> share numbers. >>>> >>>> With that said, the first step in my opinion would be to try to do >>>> database-independent schema migrations for which we could use Liquibase >>>> instead of Flyway. >>>> >>>> With Liquibase we could write the schemas in a single format and in the >>>> future apply to either MySQL or PostgreSQL. In addition, Liquibase also >>>> supports native SQL migrations so we are not losing any functionality. >>>> >>>> I'm happy to take this work up and make the necessary changes to >>>> Fineract. >>>> >>>> Note: I'm not targeting 1.6 with this change but a later release. >>>> Note2: I've created a ticket as well to track this. FINERACT-1498 >>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FINERACT-1498> >>>> >>>> Let me know your thoughts. >>>> >>>> Best, >>>> Arnold >>>> >>>
