On 9/1/06, Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
Do we want to keep relying on the system libraries for collation, or
do we want to use a cross-platform library like ICU or do we want to
create our own collation library?
ICU seems fine.
+1
t.n.a.
On Sun, 3 Sep 2006, mdean wrote:
Guys, a multiple perspective is important. Your perspective is valid, but
doesn't address the true purpose of these easy certs. They are designed to
give the companies involved larger mind space among programmers, admins, and
companies hiring them. They are
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Training I agree with, but certifications can go either way.
Guys, a multiple perspective is important. Your perspective is valid,
but doesn't address the true purpose of these easy certs. They are
designed to give the companies involved larger mind space among
Tom Lane wrote:
Josh Berkus josh@agliodbs.com writes:
In general, I think that people who harp on PostgreSQL's lack of a
benevolent dictator as an inhibitor to progress are people who are not
comfortable with democracy and are looking for excuses why company X needs
to take over the
On Thu, 31 Aug 2006, Josh Berkus wrote:
In general, I think that people who harp on PostgreSQL's lack of a
benevolent dictator as an inhibitor to progress are people who are not
comfortable with democracy and are looking for excuses why company X needs
to take over the project for its own good.
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
It's pointless to suppose that individual developers would really be
answerable to any project-wide management, since that's not who they're
paid by. So I tend to think that a project roadmap would be more of an
exercise in wishful
On Fri, Sep 01, 2006 at 12:40:53PM +0200, Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote:
heh if this is a request for a wishlist then I would suggest that we
should finally tackle one of the things most databases are doing better
then we (including MySQL) - that is better charset/locale/collate support.
Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
On Fri, Sep 01, 2006 at 12:40:53PM +0200, Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote:
heh if this is a request for a wishlist then I would suggest that we
should finally tackle one of the things most databases are doing better
then we (including MySQL) - that is better
On Fri, Sep 01, 2006 at 04:16:31PM +0200, Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote:
On the ICU vs. our own library I'm not sure what would be a good thing
to do - ICU is _LARGE_ and we already have some perfectly fine and
proven code for things like character conversion or timezone handling in
the core ...
Anton de Wet wrote:
One problem I see the postresql at the moment (and I'm porbably touching
a can of worms here) is the lack of some sort of certification.
One thing linux (or Red Hat) is doing well is supplying the things that
corporates are looking for. And the first thing they look for
On Thursday 31 August 2006 14:41, Josh Berkus wrote:
We do have portions of a meritocracy in place but we are by no means
mature in that arena. Likely because of our lock problem ;)
What specific issues do you see? We're pretty strongly merit-based -- the
only reservation I see on that is
Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
Do we want to keep relying on the system libraries for collation, or
do we want to use a cross-platform library like ICU or do we want to
create our own collation library?
ICU seems fine.
--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/
Training I agree with, but certifications can go either way. A good
example of where certifications are generally NOT going to work in your
favour is the fiasco that Oracle has created with their OCP
certification over the past 6 or so years. So many people were pushed
through these OCP
Josh,
It is current, to the point and has some direct correlations with our
project that we may want to be aware of.
Well, we're not in any danger of the board of a foundation taking over
Postgres. ;-)
The only part of this that I see as relevant to us is setting of
development goals. And
The only part of this that I see as relevant to us is setting of
development goals. And we've already discussed this ad nauseum on the
Hackers list and AFAIK have an initial plan (the enhanced TODO), lacking
only the resources to implement it this month.
Almost the whole thing is relevant
Josh,
On the other hand, we do suffer from the locked project problem (the
recent recursive query debacle is a perfect example).
Yep, and that was immediately recognized as a problem in need of a
solution. In fact, some of the arguments againts the issue/feature
tracker were that it would
In general, I think that people who harp on PostgreSQL's lack of a
benevolent dictator as an inhibitor to progress are people who are not
comfortable with democracy and are looking for excuses why company X needs
to take over the project for its own good.
Well I definitely don't think we need
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
The only part of this that I see as relevant to us is setting of
development goals. And we've already discussed this ad nauseum on the
Hackers list and AFAIK have an initial plan (the enhanced TODO), lacking
only the resources to implement it this month.
On Thu, Aug 31, 2006 at 11:18:27AM -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
On the other hand, we do suffer from the locked project problem (the
recent recursive query debacle is a perfect example).
Maybe, but we don't have the extreme form. Patches have been submitted
by people other than the ones
On the other hand, we do suffer from the locked project problem (the
recent recursive query debacle is a perfect example).
Yep, but fortunately this problem doesn't happen to us often.
I think this might happen more then you think. I ran into it with Alvaro
just a couple of days ago. I
In response to Joshua D. Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On the other hand, we do suffer from the locked project problem (the
recent recursive query debacle is a perfect example).
Yep, but fortunately this problem doesn't happen to us often.
I think this might happen more then you think.
Josh Berkus josh@agliodbs.com writes:
In general, I think that people who harp on PostgreSQL's lack of a
benevolent dictator as an inhibitor to progress are people who are not
comfortable with democracy and are looking for excuses why company X needs
to take over the project for its own
Tom Lane wrote:
Josh Berkus josh@agliodbs.com writes:
In general, I think that people who harp on PostgreSQL's lack of a
benevolent dictator as an inhibitor to progress are people who are not
comfortable with democracy and are looking for excuses why company X needs
to take over the
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
It's pointless to suppose that individual developers would really be
answerable to any project-wide management, since that's not who they're
paid by. So I tend to think that a project roadmap would be more of an
exercise in wishful thinking than a
24 matches
Mail list logo
