| From: | "Alexander Staubo" <alex(at)purefiction(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Jeff Davis" <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, "gonzales(at)linuxlouis(dot)net" <gonzales(at)linuxlouis(dot)net>, "Guillaume Lelarge" <guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info>, "Kenneth Downs" <ken(at)secdat(dot)com>, nikolay(at)samokhvalov(dot)com, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Slightly OT. |
| Date: | 2007-06-01 21:08:50 |
| Message-ID: | 88daf38c0706011408l1a6eefe8o364aa61f792e0665@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On 6/1/07, Joshua D. Drake <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
> As the owner of a company that actually actively developing a
> replication system and has for years... I suggest you start putting your
> code where your words are.
That doesn't make any sense. As a database *user* it's my prerogative
to criticize the bits that make my life painful. Intentional or not,
the Slony design compromises its user-friendliness.
I would love for the answer to have been "sorry, we did not have time
or manpower enough to implement fully transparent replication yet,
because it's a rather complex, you see"; but it's not, and I balk at
the idea that you cannot strive for something better.
For example, there is clearly an opportunity to implement the
appropriate hooks in PostgreSQL that can be used *if they are
available*; otherwise, on unpatched/older systems, require the use of
the slonik command.
Alexander.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Ian Harding | 2007-06-01 21:08:58 | Re: collision in serial numbers after INSERT? |
| Previous Message | Ron Johnson | 2007-06-01 21:07:15 | Re: why postgresql over other RDBMS |