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.
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 |