| From: | Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Jonah H(dot) Harris" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com>, Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Bernd Helmle <mailings(at)oopsware(dot)de>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: 8.4 release planning |
| Date: | 2009-01-27 08:49:56 |
| Message-ID: | 937d27e10901270049g5866dbb1rd6a66e628b8801ba@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 8:12 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> writes:
>> So, some feedback to make this decision more difficult:
>
>> Users: care about HS more than anything else in the world.
>
> I don't think this is correct. There are certainly a lot of users who
> would like an in-core replication solution, but HS by itself is not that
> --- you also need (near) real-time log shipping, which we have already
> decided to punt to 8.5. That being the case, I think the argument
> that HS is a must-have feature for 8.4 is actually rather weak.
I don't buy that. Sure, sync-rep would be the icing on the cake, but
HS with a small archive_timeout (even of the order of 10 or 15
minutes) would have been extremely useful on a number of systems I
used to run.
--
Dave Page
EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Amit Gupta | 2009-01-27 08:59:08 | Re: Table Partitioning Feature |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2009-01-27 06:41:24 | Re: 8.4 release planning |