Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Core team statement on replication in PostgreSQL

From: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Marko Kreen <markokr(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Subject: Re: Core team statement on replication in PostgreSQL
Date: 2008-05-29 21:54:36
Message-ID: 1212098076.27385.73.camel@jd-laptop (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacypgsql-hackers

On Thu, 2008-05-29 at 17:42 -0400, Robert Treat wrote:

> 
> I would have thought the read only piece would have been more important than 
> the synchronous piece. In my experience readable slaves is the big selling 
> point in both Oracle and MySQL's implementations, and people are not nearly 
> as concerned if there is a small asynchronous window.  

The read only piece is the more important piece from a market
perspective. 

Joshua D. Drake



In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Marko KreenDate: 2008-05-29 22:00:25
Subject: Re: replication hooks
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2008-05-29 21:52:37
Subject: Re: Core team statement on replication in PostgreSQL

pgsql-advocacy by date

Next:From: Chris BrowneDate: 2008-05-29 22:06:39
Subject: Re: Core team statement on replication in PostgreSQL
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2008-05-29 21:52:37
Subject: Re: Core team statement on replication in PostgreSQL

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group