On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 8:12 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> writes:
>> So, some feedback to make this decision more difficult:
>> Users: care about HS more than anything else in the world.
> I don't think this is correct. There are certainly a lot of users who
> would like an in-core replication solution, but HS by itself is not that
> --- you also need (near) real-time log shipping, which we have already
> decided to punt to 8.5. That being the case, I think the argument
> that HS is a must-have feature for 8.4 is actually rather weak.
I don't buy that. Sure, sync-rep would be the icing on the cake, but
HS with a small archive_timeout (even of the order of 10 or 15
minutes) would have been extremely useful on a number of systems I
used to run.
EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Amit Gupta||Date: 2009-01-27 08:59:08|
|Subject: Re: Table Partitioning Feature|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2009-01-27 06:41:24|
|Subject: Re: 8.4 release planning |