On 4/23/22 14:58, Peter wrote:
On Sat, Apr 23, 2022 at 02:11:00PM -0700, Adrian Klaver wrote: ! On 4/23/22 12:50, Peter wrote: ! ! ! > People seem to have been brainwashed by Web-Services and OLTP, ! > and now think the working set must always fit in memory. But this ! > is only one possible usecase, it is not the exclusive only one. ! ! This is no-win situation as most of the complaints in recent years have been ! that Postgres was/is to conservative in its default settings and is not ! taking advantage of newer more powerful hardware. I know, and You got to the point; this is exactly what I am talking about: people take the abundance of ressources as granted.
Probably because the resources are there. My phone has computing power I could only dream of when I was using a desktop of old.
In Rel. 8 postgres was a breathtaking beauty of engineering: the style of old, driven to perfection.
I would hardly call version 8.x perfection, especially the attempt at running on Windows natively.
Now You're gradually sacrificing this, for the speed junkies and to protect those from mistakes who are not engineers. And no, I don't know how this could be solved: the more influential you get, the more driven you are by public demand; the less freedom you have to follow ideals.
Whose ideals? That is the issue. Postgres covers a broad spectrum of uses and as such you will have complaints from either end that their needs are not met.
David Johnston thinks we must just not speak that out, we must instead behave like "the emperor's new clothes", and follow google's understanding of "positive values". Sorry, that doesn't work for me.
No, the complaint was that your pontificating interfered with your problem description and got in the way of coming up with a solution.
-- Adrian Klaver adrian.klaver@xxxxxxxxxxx
