Re: 9.4 Proposal: Initdb creates a single table

From: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
To: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
Cc: David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: 9.4 Proposal: Initdb creates a single table
Date: 2014-04-23 12:28:22
Message-ID: 20140423122822.GI2556@tamriel.snowman.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

* Simon Riggs (simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com) wrote:
> +1 to the idea of an example database, used throughout the docs
> Sounds like a summer of code project.

Agreed. I'll add it to the GSoC ideas page.

> Since we don't have that now, it won't work for 9.4.

None of this is on the table for 9.4 as far as I'm concerned..

> I still like the idea of a database installed by default on initdb, by
> default. Packagers can of course do what they like.

I fail to see the point of adding something that's targetted at novice /
end-users which 90% (yes, it's a random # that I pulled, but it's surely
the majority, at least) of installs won't have.

For my 2c, it'd also be a disservice to our users and to ourselves to
encourage a design that minimizes the database's understanding of the
data and greatly reduces the set of PG's capabilities that can be used.

Thanks,

Stephen

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Heikki Linnakangas 2014-04-23 12:43:46 Re: WAL replay bugs
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2014-04-23 12:26:02 Re: pg_upgrade and epoch