Re: Lets (not) break all the things. Was: [pgsql-advocacy] 9.6 -> 10.0

From: Justin Clift <justin(at)postgresql(dot)org>
To: Yury Zhuravlev <u(dot)zhuravlev(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Lets (not) break all the things. Was: [pgsql-advocacy] 9.6 -> 10.0
Date: 2016-04-12 14:08:03
Message-ID: C2B72FD1-5976-4A64-8795-7CB5B37934D9@postgresql.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 12 Apr 2016, at 14:12, Yury Zhuravlev <u(dot)zhuravlev(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> wrote:
> Justin Clift wrote:
>> Simon included a short starter list of potentials which might be in
>> that category:
>>
>> * SQL compliant identifiers
>> * Remove RULEs
>> * Change recovery.conf
>> * Change block headers
>> * Retire template0, template1
>> * Optimise FSM
>> * Add heap metapage
>> * Alter tuple headers
>> et al
>
> + CMake build I think.
>
> Now I can build:
> * postgres
> * bin/* programs
> * pl/* languages
> * contrib/* (with cmake PGXS analogue)
>
> Can run regression and isolation tests for postgres/pl* and all contrib modules.
> There is still a lot of work but I hope everything will turn out. Also it would be good to get help.
>
> Thanks.
>
> PS https://github.com/stalkerg/postgres_cmake

If/when PostgreSQL can be built and tested with CMake... why would the
resulting code + database files + network protocol (etc) not be compatible
with previous versions? :)

+ Justin

--
"My grandfather once told me that there are two kinds of people: those
who work and those who take the credit. He told me to try to be in the
first group; there was less competition there."
- Indira Gandhi

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Kapila 2016-04-12 14:12:11 Re: Move PinBuffer and UnpinBuffer to atomics
Previous Message Christian Ullrich 2016-04-12 13:52:10 Re: Preprocessor condition fix