On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 01:16:17PM +0000, Gregory Stark wrote:
> I'm putting together a talk on "PostgreSQL Pet Peeves" for
> discussion at FOSDEM 2009 this year. I have a pretty good idea what
> some them are of course, but I would be interested to hear if people
> have any complaints from personal experience. What would be most
> interesting is if you can explain an example of when the problem
> caused real inconvenience to you, since sometimes it's hard to see
> from a theoretical description where the real harm lies.
> So, what do people say? Is Postgres perfect in your world or does
> it do some things which rub you the wrong way?
> Feel free to respond on-list or if you prefer in personal emails. I
> do intend to use the ideas you give in my presentation so mark
> anything you wouldn't be happy to see in a slide at a conference
> some day.
* No built-in ways to get the information psql gets. "See what psql
is doing" isn't an option when somebody doesn't have psql on hand.
* No deferrable UNIQUE constraints.
* No man pages for the internals.
* Letter options in psql, pg_dump[all], pg_restore aren't consistent
and can easily steer you very wrong. I'm looking at you, -d.
* CTEs not yet integrated into the adjacency lists in pg_catalog, etc.
The following aren't problems with the PostgreSQL core engine itself,
but they're nearby, so they catch ire:
* Neither pgAdmin nor phpPgAdmin includes any facilities for
* Neither of them let you set up Slony (or any other replication
system) to start with.
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david(dot)fetter(at)gmail(dot)com
Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
In response to
pgsql-general by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2009-01-29 17:01:09|
|Subject: Re: Full backup - pg_dumpall sufficient? |
|Previous:||From: Raymond O'Donnell||Date: 2009-01-29 16:56:07|
|Subject: Re: Full backup - pg_dumpall sufficient?|