My wish list for Postgres 9.5
craigkerstiens.com
craigkerstiens.com
After a while, I realized that some of this was just the maturity of the extension, but a huge amount was the limitations of FDWs as a platform. And not only that, it seems that every other 3rd party FDW extension is either abandoned or ignored.
Postgres is quite possibly the highest quality piece of software I use. I rate it higher than the Linux Kernel. But Postgres' historical approaches to extensibility have left a lot to be desired. Reading over this comment, I realize I probably sound like an entitled jackass, but I'll post it anyway. I really do wish I could contribute to Postgres, but learning C well enough to contribute is way out of reach for me at the moment. But I guess all I can say is that my (admittedly vague) wishlist for Postgres 9.5 is to enhance any and all features to support extensibility, including FDWs and Extensions.
I'm sure they accept money in lieu of C skills.
We're actively working on improving the cstore_fdw extension and your feedback is valuable to us. We're keeping a list of open issues on GitHub, and prioritize them for upcoming releases based on your comments.
If you have any requests, please give us your feedback here: https://github.com/citusdata/cstore_fdw/issues
For performance and compression related questions, we'd also love to hear more from you and help if we can in any way: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/cstore-users
As PostgreSQL covers a huge feature set, we know that it will take time on our end to get there. Some of that will involve new foreign table features from PostgreSQL core, such as foreign indexes and foreign table inheritance. I just wanted to let you know that we are working hard in that journey to get there.
I found this list. I'll go through them.
https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Community_Guide_to_PostgreS...
I highly recommend learning psql first. It doesn't have every feature you might want, but it gets the basics right and is easy to integrate with your editor and other tools. As far as I can tell, it's what most professionals use.
In particular, learn the \ commands. It's extremely useful to be able to quickly look at the structure of a table, dump the source to a function and so on, from a command prompt rather than navigating trees with the mouse in pgAdmin.
It uses readline where available so you get history, completion etc.
You can get part of the way there by Sublime Text to run queries and browse results. In Sublime, it's easy - you can create a custom "build tool" with (essentially) just one line of config... you're basically just piping the current file's contents to command-line PSQL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tPd4m3PLVqU
Then I use the SublimeAllAutocomplete package. It works just like "regular" Sublime autocomplete except it gives you autocomplete suggestions from all open files, not just the current one - so if you have your DB schema dump in another window it will use that: https://github.com/alienhard/SublimeAllAutocomplete
Obviously, that doesn't really give you the smartest autocomplete ever but it's pretty productive for me. Tons of room for improvement though.
Automatically maintain clustering on a table
Many of the changes already went into 9.4 but for PostgreSQL to be a 'killer' of external tools would be ridiculously awesome.
My favorite PostgreSQL GUI is: http://www.sqlmanager.net/products/postgresql/manager, it's excellent overall.
As far as it being windows only, I thought that was no longer an issue thanks to great tools like Parallels and VMWare Fusion. Can't you just open the app in that while still living in your OS?
I honestly don't see much of an issue.
It would be nice if they made a cross platform version, I remember they used to support Linux somehow.
First you essentially say "they shouldn't make their own, as this $350 tool's business might be impacted" and then when people raise legitimate concerns (e.g. that it doesn't support their platform) you suggest even more expensive ways to mitigate it (an additional $300+).
So essentially your argument is: "They shouldn't make a free GUI, there is $350 of commercial software that might lose business, that runs on all systems if you spend $350 for a VM+licence."
I'm struggling to take you even a tiny bit seriously here.
What would you expect from a language improvement point of view? Its a declarative language so you can't expect a load of object oriented features. I found that once I learned to think in sets, the language doesn't bother me. There is a certain simplicity to it, that is fairly elegant.
I'm sure an specification is gladly appreciated.
The requirements list for any "D" (that is, the definition of membership in the class of languages) is here in The Third Manifesto: http://www.dcs.warwick.ac.uk/~hugh/TTM/TTM-2013-02-07.pdf
- Structured rows to kill all grouping special cases and the distinction between where and having.
- Hierarchical rows so that join(Planet, Person) doesn't repeat Planet columns in each returned row.
Linq already gets you 1 and 2. See http://www.linqpad.net/WhyLINQBeatsSQL.aspx Xml gets you 3.
As it stands now, if you're replicating from a master, you can't do anything else. This is something that MySQL could do over a decade ago.