Re: Core team statement on replication in PostgreSQL

From: Andrew Sullivan <ajs(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Core team statement on replication in PostgreSQL
Date: 2008-05-30 02:38:28
Message-ID: 20080530023828.GA46626@commandprompt.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy pgsql-hackers

On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 07:02:56PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:

> People want the bits to go from point A to point B; they don't want
> to have to research, design, test, and administer their own solution
> for moving the bits.

I agree with this. I think I probably know as well as most people --
perhaps less well than maybe two people in the world -- where most of
the bodies in Slony are hidden, and I still find it a pain to
administer. Other systems are only somewhat less troublesome; and I
really do know about the concepts involved. I'm not tripping on
important things. It's just some work to set up.

Other systems hide that work.

Given that (for instance) psql is really very easy to use once you
know a few things, the ongoing pain of simple replication in Postgres
is a big wart.

A

--
Andrew Sullivan
ajs(at)commandprompt(dot)com
+1 503 667 4564 x104
http://www.commandprompt.com/

In response to

Browse pgsql-advocacy by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Merlin Moncure 2008-05-30 02:59:21 Re: Core team statement on replication in PostgreSQL
Previous Message Josh Berkus 2008-05-30 01:26:36 Re: Core team statement on replication in PostgreSQL

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Merlin Moncure 2008-05-30 02:59:21 Re: Core team statement on replication in PostgreSQL
Previous Message Euler Taveira de Oliveira 2008-05-30 02:22:11 Re: Initial max_connections for initdb on FreeBSD.