maria-developers team mailing list archive

[Roberto Spadim <roberto@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

nice :) no problem

2014-06-03 16:00 GMT-03:00 Sergei Golubchik <serg@xxxxxxxxxxx>:
> Hi, Roberto!
>
> On Jun 03, Roberto Spadim wrote:
>> hi sergei, i think it's easy too
>> maybe we could have some kind of servers, one for debug, one for
>> production with instrumentations features and a clean server without
>> intrumentations, just an idea, i think some time ago mysql was
>> releasing mysql-dev, mysql-debug, mysql-xxx i'm wrong?
>
> Yes, it was. And it was confusing and we had to explain all the time
> what MySQL-max was and how it was different from simply "MySQL".
> I wouldn't want to repeat this experience.
>
> But in this particular case it is not necessary at all. As far as I
> understand, Pavel will compile his own binary anyway. The only issue
> is that MariaDB does not compile without performance schema at all.
> And it happens because we don't normally compile without performance
> schema, so when such a configuration breaks, we simply don't notice it.
>
> But now I've reconfigured one of the builders in buildbot to compile
> MariaDB without performance schema. And we'll immediately notice when
> it won't compile, so in the future we can be sure that MariaDB can be
> built without performance schema. Even if we won't release binaries that
> were built that way.
>
> Regards,
> Sergei
>
>> > On Jun 03, Pavel Ivanov wrote:
>> >> I personally would prefer if MariaDB had performance schema not
>> >> compiled in by default. Then we wouldn't be frustrated every time we
>> >> upgrade and find out that the tarball doesn't compile without
>> >> performance schema (yes, 10.0.11 doesn't compile).
>> >
>> > This is easy to fix. I'll change one of our builders (that doesn't
>> > do release packages) to compile without performance schema.
>> >



-- 
Roberto Spadim
SPAEmpresarial
Eng. Automação e Controle