Re: Changeset Extraction v7.3

On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 05:31:25PM -0500, Rod Taylor wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 4:56 PM, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>wrote:
>
> > On 2014-01-28 21:48:09 +0000, Thom Brown wrote:
> > > On 28 January 2014 21:37, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 11:53 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
> > wrote:
> > > >> I've rebased it here and am hacking on it still.
> > > >
> > > > Andres and I are going back and forth between our respective git repos
> > > > hacking on this, and I think we're getting there, but I have a
> > > > terminological question which I'd like to submit to a wider audience:
> > > >
> > > > The point of Andres's patch set is to introduce a new technology
> > > > called logical decoding; that is, the ability to get a replication
> > > > stream that is based on changes to tuples rather than changes to
> > > > blocks. It could also be called logical replication. In these
> > > > patches, our existing replication is referred to as "physical"
> > > > replication, which sounds kind of funny to me. Anyone have another
> > > > suggestion?
> > >
> > > Logical and Binary replication?
> >
> > Unfortunately changeset extraction output's can be binary data...
> >
>
> Perhaps Logical and Block?
>
> The existing replication mechanism is similar to block-based disk backups.
> It's the whole thing (not parts) and doesn't have any concept of
> database/directory.

+1 for this terminology. It's descriptive.

Cheers,
David.
--
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david(dot)fetter(at)gmail(dot)com
iCal: webcal://www.tripit.com/feed/ical/people/david74/tripit.ics

Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate