There has been some previous discussion of removing the contrib/rserv
module, on the grounds that (1) it's horribly obsolete and unmaintained,
and (2) its presence in the core distribution may mislead users into not
considering the newer better replication solutions available elsewhere
(erserver, slony, etc).

Although plans for a more general cleanup of contrib/ will have to go
back on the shelf for a future release, the core committee is still of
the opinion that it'd be wise to remove rserv in 8.0.  Anyone who
really wants it will always be able to get it from our CVS archives or
old release tarballs, but we really should be pushing them to use
something else.  AFAIK, everything worth salvaging from rserv is
present in the descendant rservimp project on gborg.

Is there anyone out there who'd like to object?

			regards, tom lane

Sun, 22 Aug 2004 14:26:56 -0400
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Call for objections: removing contrib/rserv for 8.0
Tom Lane wrote:

>Although plans for a more general cleanup of contrib/ will have to go
>back on the shelf for a future release, the core committee is still of
>the opinion that it'd be wise to remove rserv in 8.0.  Anyone who
>really wants it will always be able to get it from our CVS archives or
>old release tarballs, but we really should be pushing them to use
>something else.  AFAIK, everything worth salvaging from rserv is
>present in the descendant rservimp project on gborg.
>
>Is there anyone out there who'd like to object?
>
>  
>
I vote yes for obvious reasons.

Also we really should probably rip out Tsearch (not Tsearc2) as well.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake



>			regards, tom lane
>
>---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
>TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your
>      joining column's datatypes do not match
>  
>


-- 
Command Prompt, Inc., home of Mammoth PostgreSQL - S/ODBC and S/JDBC
Postgresql support, programming shared hosting and dedicated hosting.
+1-503-667-4564 - jd@commandprompt.com - http://www.commandprompt.com
PostgreSQL Replicator -- production quality replication for PostgreSQL


Sun, 22 Aug 2004 11:46:31 -0700
"Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>
Re: Call for objections: removing contrib/rserv for 8.0
"Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Although plans for a more general cleanup of contrib/ will have to go
>> back on the shelf for a future release, the core committee is still of
>> the opinion that it'd be wise to remove rserv in 8.0.

> Also we really should probably rip out Tsearch (not Tsearc2) as well.

Eventually yes, but I'm not too concerned about it misleading people,
since the competition (tsearch2) is right there beside it.  The contrib
tree needs a thorough going over to eliminate deadwood, but during beta
is probably not the time to undertake that project.

			regards, tom lane

Sun, 22 Aug 2004 15:02:05 -0400
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: Call for objections: removing contrib/rserv for 8.0 
>>>Although plans for a more general cleanup of contrib/ will have to go
>>>back on the shelf for a future release, the core committee is still of
>>>the opinion that it'd be wise to remove rserv in 8.0.
> 
> 
>>Also we really should probably rip out Tsearch (not Tsearc2) as well.
> 
> 
> Eventually yes, but I'm not too concerned about it misleading people,
> since the competition (tsearch2) is right there beside it.  The contrib
> tree needs a thorough going over to eliminate deadwood, but during beta
> is probably not the time to undertake that project.

Tsearch is 100% different to tsearch2 in every way, and converting old 
tsearch stuff to tsearch2 is non-trivial and involved a LOT of changes - 
I suggest leaving it there.  It took a significant amount of work for us 
to change over our ~ 20 tsearch indexes to tsearch2 at my work.

Chris

Mon, 23 Aug 2004 09:30:35 +0800
Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au>
Re: Call for objections: removing contrib/rserv for 8.0