| From: | ow <oneway_111(at)yahoo(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Are we losing momentum? |
| Date: | 2003-04-15 23:56:24 |
| Message-ID: | 20030415235624.38577.qmail@web21403.mail.yahoo.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-advocacy pgsql-general pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
--- Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> This is nonsense. There is no scenario where one DB "goes down" and
> other DBs on the same postmaster remain up. There are advantages to
> having separate DBs on one postmaster (like separate copies of the
> system catalogs), but there's very little reliability differential
> compared to a multi-schema approach.
Perhaps "goes down" is not the best term. You can replace it with "is
not available" (as in being restored, etc) if you like.
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo
http://search.yahoo.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Rob Butler | 2003-04-16 00:08:44 | Re: Are we losing momentum? |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-04-15 23:28:27 | Re: Are we losing momentum? |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | netadmin | 2003-04-16 00:00:42 | Re: Upgrade to Red Hat Linux 9 broke PostgreSQL |
| Previous Message | Lamar Owen | 2003-04-15 23:47:08 | Re: Upgrade to Red Hat Linux 9 broke PostgreSQL |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | netadmin | 2003-04-16 00:00:42 | Re: Upgrade to Red Hat Linux 9 broke PostgreSQL |
| Previous Message | ow | 2003-04-15 23:51:18 | Re: Are we losing momentum? |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Rob Butler | 2003-04-16 00:08:44 | Re: Are we losing momentum? |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-04-15 23:28:27 | Re: Are we losing momentum? |