Re: [HACKERS] Replication documentation addition

Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 25, 2006 at 08:42:07PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> > > Something else worth doing though is to have a paragraph explaining why
> > > there's no built-in replication. I don't have time to write something
> > > right now, but I can do it later tonight if no one beats me to it.
> >
> > I thought that was implied in the early paragraph about why there are
> > many solutions.
>
> I think we should explicitely spell it out, especially considering how
> many times people ask about it. How about...
>
> This multitude of choices is why PostgreSQL does not ship with a
> replication solution by default; any bundled solution would only
> satisfy a subset of replication needs.

The problem is that we do have some solutions in our code, like doing
data partitioning in the application, warm standby, or using a shared
disk for failover, so how do we spell that out? I say there are
multiple solutions, but I don't see how I can say that all are external
and not included.

--
Bruce Momjian bruce(at)momjian(dot)us
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +