Re: replication wordsmithing / clarifications

On Sat, Sep 12, 2020 at 12:40:45PM -0400, Robert Treat wrote:
> maybe "to one or more replicas." or maybe "to one or more replica
> targets." I'd avoid the word cluster because you could set it up to
> send to multiple databases in the same postgres cluster.

Magnus has given a better suggestion: to just use "servers".

> If you think about it, this sentence is essentially saying "If you
> don't like the downsides of this replication method, you can use an
> entirely different replication method." Well sure, you could, but once
> you are using a different method, you are no longer using the method
> we are trying to describe. In addition, there are several other
> systems you could use beyond the suggested one, so suggestion this
> specific one felt mis-leading or out of place. And it is not something
> we talk about in any of the other sections (after all, every
> replication system has trade-offs that might not be acceptable, that's
> why we have so many of them).

OK, I see your point. Seeing like that, it makes sense.
--
Michael