anarazel

169 ms·

1561.
by anarazel 12y ago
As somebody working on postgres, I don't find the comparison to be done in a particularly fair, or helpful, way. MSSQL is a pretty good database and deserves to be fairly evaluated. Don't get me wrong, I have 'political'
1562.
by anarazel 12y ago
In Postgres we had to hack around: * Lack of the C11 version of StaticAssert(), IIRC only the C++ version of static asserts is supported. Yay for things like #define StaticAssertStmt(condition, errmessage) \ ((void) sizeof(struct { int sta
1563.
by anarazel 12y ago
> With all that said, I'm not convinced that people "should" read long form books. I read all those books because I personally enjoyed it. I just can't say with confidence that others should do the same or they will b
1564.
by anarazel 12y ago
I think whether reassembling more coarse grained changes is realistic depends quite heavily on the schema and the existing usage. There's enough schemas, even pretty normalized ones, where that's pretty simple for the frequently c
1565.
by anarazel 12y ago
It's much simpler (being a slightly modified 3 clause BSD license). Including not having a patent clause, which has it's pros and cons...
1566.
by anarazel 12y ago
Hm, another thing came to mind: What's the reason for the license choice? I guess you chose apache because of kafka? Maybe I'm too much of a postgres nerd, but I always like PG extensions to be under the postgres license ;) (not t
1567.
by anarazel 12y ago
Cool. Since logical decoding got in I'd hoped somebody would write something roughly like this... I also didn't know about decoderbufs. > Fortunately, you don’t have to install the plugin on your leader database — you can just
1568.
by anarazel 12y ago
There's infrastructure for that in postgres, since 9.4. See http://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/static/logicaldecoding.... for the (somewhat low level) description of the feature. You'd have to wri