Bruce Momjian wrote:
Indeed. Given the (presumably large) delta between EDB's code and ours,
having to have some delta in pg_upgrade isn't going to make much
difference for them. I think the community code and docs should
completely omit any mention of that.
I am trying to think of this as a non-EnterpriseDB employee. If suppose
Greenplum had given us a utility and they wanted it to work with their
version of the database, what accommodation would we make for them? I
agree on the documentation, but would we allow #ifdefs that were only
used by them if there were only a few of them? Could we treat it as an
operating system that none of us use? I don't think Greenplum would
require us to keep support for their database, but they would prefer it,
and it might encourage more contributions from them. Maybe we would
just tell them to keep their own patches, but I figured I would ask
specifically so we have a policy for next time.
I guess another question is whether we would accept a patch that was
useful only for a Greenplum build? And does removing such code use the
same criteria?
I know pgAdmin supports Greenplum, but that is an external tool so it
makes more sense there.
What if several vendors want the same thing? The code will quickly
become spaghetti.
AFAIK the Linux kernel expects distros to keep their patchsets
separately, and I rather think we should too.
cheers
andrew
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
