Re: PostgreSQL Auditing

From: José Luis Tallón <jltallon(at)adv-solutions(dot)net>
To: Curtis Ruck <curtis(dot)ruck+pgsql(dot)hackers(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL Auditing
Date: 2016-02-02 10:47:31
Message-ID: 56B08943.9080109@adv-solutions.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 02/02/2016 02:05 AM, Curtis Ruck wrote:
> [snip]
>
> P.S., do you know what sucks, having a highly performant PostGIS
> database that works great, and being told to move to Oracle or SQL
> Server (because they have auditing). Even though they charge extra
> for Geospatial support (seriously?) or when they don't even have
> geospatial support (10 years ago). My customer would prefer to
> re-engineer software designed around PostgreSQL and pay the overpriced
> licenses, than not have auditing. I agree that their cost analysis is
> probably way off, even 10 years later, my only solution would be to
> move to Oracle, SQL Server, a NoSQL solution, or pay EnterpriseDB for
> their 2 year old version that doesn't have all the cool/modern jsonb
> support.

Huh? PPAS 9.5.0.5 is already out there since at least last week; Before
that PPAS 9.4.5.y or so was there ...
(Not affiliated with EDB, but precision is important)

I agree that auditing is a big selling point and frequently used... But
it's got to be done "the Postgres way", and that takes time (and usually
provides superior results).

Just my .02€

/ J.L.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Simon Riggs 2016-02-02 11:00:57 Re: PostgreSQL Auditing
Previous Message Simon Riggs 2016-02-02 10:37:15 Re: Raising the checkpoint_timeout limit