For people who have been following this topic, a reminder that later
today there will be a TC meeting dedicated to discussing this issues
captured by this thread[1], the related thread on active or passive
database approaches[2] and the two reviews about "what to do about
postgreSQL" [3][4].
It
Thanks. It’s more of a question of not leaving people high and dry when they
have made a reasonable choice in the past based on the choices supported at the
time.
Tim
On 23.05.17, 21:14, "Sean Dague" wrote:
On 05/23/2017 02:35 PM, Tim Bell wrote:
> Is there a proposal where deployment
On 05/23/2017 02:35 PM, Tim Bell wrote:
> Is there a proposal where deployments who chose Postgres on good faith can
> find migration path to a MySQL based solution?
Yes, a migration tool exploration is action #2 in the current proposal.
Also, to be clear, we're not at the stage of removing anyt
Is there a proposal where deployments who chose Postgres on good faith can find
migration path to a MySQL based solution?
Tim
On 23.05.17, 18:35, "Octave J. Orgeron" wrote:
As OpenStack has evolved and grown, we are ending up with more and more
MySQL-isms in the code. I'd love to see
As OpenStack has evolved and grown, we are ending up with more and more
MySQL-isms in the code. I'd love to see OpenStack support every database
out there, but that is becoming more and more difficult. I've tried to
get OpenStack to work with other databases like Oracle DB, MongoDB,
TimesTen, N
On 05/22/2017 11:26 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote:
> On 5/22/2017 10:58 AM, Sean Dague wrote:
>> I think these are actually compatible concerns. The current proposal to
>> me actually tries to address A1 & B1, with a hint about why A2 is
>> valuable and we would want to do that.
>>
>> It feels like ther
On Mon, 22 May 2017, Sean Dague wrote:
This feels like what a Tier 2 support looks like. A basic SQLA and pray
so that if you live behind SQLA you are probably fine (though not
tested), and then test and advanced feature roll out on a single
platform. Any of that work might port to other platfor
On 5/22/2017 10:58 AM, Sean Dague wrote:
I think these are actually compatible concerns. The current proposal to
me actually tries to address A1 & B1, with a hint about why A2 is
valuable and we would want to do that.
It feels like there would be a valuable follow on in which A2 & B2 were
addres
On 05/15/2017 07:16 AM, Sean Dague wrote:
> We had a forum session in Boston on Postgresql and out of that agreed to
> the following steps forward:
>
> 1. explicitly warn in operator facing documentation that Postgresql is
> less supported than MySQL. This was deemed better than just removing
> do
We had a forum session in Boston on Postgresql and out of that agreed to
the following steps forward:
1. explicitly warn in operator facing documentation that Postgresql is
less supported than MySQL. This was deemed better than just removing
documentation, because when people see Postgresql files
10 matches
Mail list logo