h4. Community Options
* https://github.com/CrunchyData/postgres-operator
* https://github.com/zalando/postgres-operator
h4. What option from Community shows better?
* https://github.com/CrunchyData/postgres-operator
PS:
* Better doc
* This one is in the [operatorhub.io|https://operatorhub.io/?category=Database] and the other not
h4. What image and version we are using currently in the specs of the MSSDB CR?
* The imaged used in this project is from Red Hat. See more in https://docs.okd.io/latest/using_images/db_images/postgresql.html
* image: "centos/PostgreSQL-96-centos7"
PS.: The MSS project was developed and tested so far with PostgreSQL 9.6
h4. What are the CONS of changing our MSS operator to use it currently, at least?
* Shows that we will not able to use the RedHat image and we will need to use the CrunchyData image
* The CrunchyData can be deprecated and/or discontinued. It has not a big community and/or many contributors and users
* We may face some issues and limitations as for example, we will be not able to do some specific setup and/or fix some issue and/or handle it for providing the status for the RHMI as it is done currently
* The effort required in order to understand how it is working, how to setup it, how we can try to make the MSS operator have it and or get its status for the RHMI.
* May this adoption can increase the complexity unnecessarily to keep it maintained.
h4. Conclusion:
IMHO we should keep the database as a type for now and do not care over at least currently. Following the reasons
* The current implementation attends all our needs and is quite simple and easy to keep maintained, changed, replaced, disabled etc..
* Also, the current implementation allows we easily, without any code change, make the MSS use another database and/or disabled this type, change the image and/or its versions as the parameters and values used
* IMHO add now the CrunchyData shows spend unnecessary effort and could make it more complex
|
|
