|From:||"Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>|
|To:||Steve Crawford <scrawford(at)pinpointresearch(dot)com>|
|Cc:||Kris Jurka <books(at)ejurka(dot)com>, Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org>, Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org|
|Subject:||Re: What's going on with pgfoundry?|
|Views:||Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox|
On Wed, 26 Nov 2008, Steve Crawford wrote:
> Obscurity should not be your *only* line of defense, but camouflage
> helps as well. And even if it didn't, it still reduces server-load,
> bandwidth and heaps of logfile cruft.
In order case, thankfully, there was minimal banwidth impact, but the
server load on some of the machines was to the point of unusability ...
again, thankfully, that didn't manifest it self on any of the postgresql
servers, but we didn't want to take any chances of it bleeding over ...
|Next Message||David Fetter||2008-11-26 19:00:47||Re: Comments to Synchronous replication patch v3|
|Previous Message||Steve Crawford||2008-11-26 18:51:23||Re: What's going on with pgfoundry?|