Re: [HACKERS] Happy column dropping

From: Don Baccus <dhogaza(at)pacifier(dot)com>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Happy column dropping
Date: 2000-01-25 15:35:52
Message-ID: 3.0.1.32.20000125073552.00f7a9b0@mail.pacifier.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

At 12:29 AM 1/25/00 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:

>We have to be realistic. It is no good to have one command that has 100
>fancy capabilities while 100 other commands are broken or are more
>important.
>
>Doesn't mean we don't do a great job, but that sometimes it is not worth
>it considering the other things we can be doing.
>
>If you are suggesting we don't follow that plan, I have to disagree.

In general, I don't disagree with this. But a drop column command that
kills all constraints on a table won't be terribly useful to folks. I'm
thinking of the fact that this same version will have referential
integrity constraints, which will be used by many. These will be dropped,
too, if I understand things correctly.

I think my emotional reaction is mostly to the fact that it was
put into sources that I presumed were to be released in beta form
just a few days afterwards. With no prior discussion.

>From Peter's notes, it is clear that his perception of a beta version
might differ somewhat from that which has been traditional with the
postgres group. And that makes me very nervous, since I'm planning
to try to base further porting work on that beta. Obviously, I
don't need to use "drop column", but if the release model drifts more
towards the "break often, break early" model then then I'll have to
rethink my usage of Postgres betas.

(no, we won't release our port on the beta, we're just hoping that
the beta will be solid enough that we can work with it, and release
our beta on top of the resulting version of PG).

Now, couple this with all the problems associated with some apparently
below-par changes to libpq - which I absolutely depend on - and I start
worrying that the excellent stability of the 6.5 beta and subsequent
full releases might become an abberration rather than the norm.

I know folks don't want that...

Anyway, this perhaps is mostly a communication problem, as Peter
apparently thought that the Postgres group follows the "release early,
release often" model.

- Don Baccus, Portland OR <dhogaza(at)pacifier(dot)com>
Nature photos, on-line guides, Pacific Northwest
Rare Bird Alert Service and other goodies at
http://donb.photo.net.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Hiroshi Inoue 2000-01-25 15:40:00 RE: [HACKERS] Sure enough, SI buffer overrun is broken
Previous Message Don Baccus 2000-01-25 15:24:32 Re: [HACKERS] Happy column dropping