Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Provide much better wait information in pg_stat_activity.

2016-03-11 23:22 GMT+01:00 Joel Jacobson <joel(at)trustly(dot)com>:

> On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 5:09 AM, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
> wrote:
> >> What we need is more input on proposed changes from other companies
> >> who are also heavy users of PL/pgSQL.
> >>
> >> Only then can we move forward. It's like Robert is saying, there is a
> >> risk for bikeshedding here,
> >> we must widen our perspectives and get better understanding for how
> >> other heavy users are using PL/pgSQL.
> >
> >
> > I disagree with this opinion - this is community sw, not commercial. We
> can
> > do nothing if we don't find a agreement.
>
> I disagree with your disagreement.
>
> The users are what matters, and many of them are of course not on this
> list (since this is a list for hackers), so we need to reach out to
> the users, and those are companies/websites/nonprofits/governments.
> So discussing proposed changes on this list will take us absolutely
> nowhere, without further input from actual heavy users.
> Once we do have input from the heavy users, then and only then can we
> continue discussing things on this list, but before then it's kind of
> pointless, because we don't know what the most commonly proposed
> changes are, not you, not me. The risk of bikeshedding is just too
> big, like Robert pointed out.
>

I sent a list of requested features. Really, I have not any request from
companies when I worked, did training, consultations for less verbosity or
significant changes in languages. The people miss the features from Oracle,
MSSQL.

>
> >> Pavel, do you know of any such companies?
> > Probably the biggest company with pretty large code of PL/pgSQL was
> Skype,
> > but I have not any info about current state.
>
> True! I had almost forgotten about them after Microsoft acquired them.
> Let's hope they are still on PostgreSQL. I'll check it out, thanks.
>