Re: 7.4?

From: Hervé Piedvache <herve(at)elma(dot)fr>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>
Cc: "Ed L(dot)" <pgsql(at)bluepolka(dot)net>, Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>, Joe Tomcat <tomcat(at)mobile(dot)mp>, PostgreSQL General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Darren Johnson <darren(at)up(dot)hrcoxmail(dot)com>, reynaud(at)elma(dot)fr, pgreplication-general(at)gborg(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: 7.4?
Date: 2003-02-26 10:55:51
Message-ID: 20030226110156.4FD8E4180F@mailer.elma.fr
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Le Mercredi 26 Février 2003 07:52, Tom Lane a écrit :
> Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> writes:
> > On Tue, 2003-02-25 at 22:44, Ed L. wrote:
> >> And do I understand correctly the replication to be eventually
> >> included will be an embedded syncronous replication solution based on
> >> Postgres-R and the Spread GCS?
> >
> > No, I don't think that's set in stone (although I can't speak for the
> > core team). While I think Postgres-R is promising, there might be room
> > for additional replication implementations that cater to different sets
> > of requirements.
>
> There absolutely *is* room for multiple replication implementations.
> AFAICS there's no one-size-fits-all approach. I did and still do like
> Postgres-R as a pretty useful approach, but it should not be mistaken
> for The One True Path.
>
> Also, there are nontrivial licensing issues involved. The PG-R design
> depends on an underlying "group communication" system, which is a
> nontrivial bit of software that none of the core team wants to rewrite.
> But none of the available GC systems are BSD-license open source. We
> had had some hopes of getting Spread to offer BSD terms, but that seems
> to have fallen through. So right now, PG-R is on the outside looking
> in, as far as inclusion in the core distribution goes :-(
>
> regards, tom lane

You mean the PG-R project will no be included in the PostgreSQL project
unless someone rewrite the Spread GCS concept or similar system in a BSD
licence ?

What a bad news for the community ... ! :o(

PG-R seems to be the best integrated solution of the moment ... Still a lot
of work ... but Darren and others are making a real good job !

DBMirror or rserv (commercial application) seems to be only triggers, and
little demon not included in PostgreSQL system ... as PG-R is ...

PostgreSQL really need an official Replication solution to be definitively
secured in a productive environnement ... and I think I'm not the only one
thinking like that ... looking the survey of Postgres.org web site :
http://www.postgresql.org/survey.php?View=1&SurveyID=9
--
Hervé Piedvache

Elma Ingénierie Informatique
6 rue du Faubourg Saint-Honoré
F-75008 - Paris - France
Tel. 33-144949901
fax. 33-144949902

In response to

  • Re: 7.4? at 2003-02-26 06:52:30 from Tom Lane

Responses

  • Re: 7.4? at 2003-02-26 15:24:39 from Tom Lane
  • Re: 7.4? at 2003-02-26 17:24:26 from Ed L.
  • Re: 7.4? at 2003-03-06 16:44:21 from Bruce Momjian

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Csaba Nagy 2003-02-26 11:25:20 Re: Using PGSQL to help coordinate many servers
Previous Message Alvin Hung 2003-02-26 10:45:32 Using PGSQL to help coordinate many servers