Bruce Momjian wrote: > We don't have roll-forward logging until 7.1, and require vacuum > regularly. Other than that, I don't know of any major issues. > Reliability has always been of primary importance. We wouldn't be where > we are today without reliability. Here's an idea: How about a web poll on www.postgresql.org to assess the current state of affairs from the user's perspective? That would have several advantages. First, it's pretty easy to do. Second, if there are, in fact, few or no outstanding major reliability issues, that's good to know and provides firmer footing for feature planning (also great marketing fodder). Third, it could provide a quantitative baseline for future comparisons, helping everyone to get warm fuzzies when measurable improvement appears. Most importantly, it would provide an opportunity for corrective action if by chance current assumptions are wrong. Cheers, Ed Loehr ************
- [GENERAL] Future of PostgreSQL Bruce Momjian
- Re: [GENERAL] Future of PostgreSQL Peter Eisentraut
- Re: [GENERAL] Future of PostgreSQL Bruce Momjian
- Re: [GENERAL] Future of PostgreSQ... Jose Miguel Pereira Tavares
- Re: [GENERAL] Future of Postg... Bruce Momjian
- Re: [GENERAL] Future of PostgreSQL Ed Loehr
- Re: [GENERAL] Future of PostgreSQL Bruce Momjian
- Re: [GENERAL] Future of PostgreSQ... Ed Loehr
- Re: [GENERAL] Future of Postg... Bruce Momjian
- Re: [GENERAL] Future of ... Ed Loehr
- Re: [GENERAL] Future... Marc G. Fournier
- Re: [GENERAL] Fu... Ed Loehr
- Re: [GENERAL] Future of PostgreSQL Marten Feldtmann
- Re: [GENERAL] Future of PostgreSQL Clark C. Evans
- Re: [GENERAL] Future of PostgreSQL Bruce Momjian
- Re: [GENERAL] Future of PostgreSQ... Clark C. Evans
- Re: [GENERAL] Future of PostgreSQ... john huttley
- Re: [GENERAL] Future of Postg... Bruce Momjian
- Re: [GENERAL] Future of Postg... Adriaan Joubert
- Re: [GENERAL] Future of PostgreSQ... Howie