Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: 8.4 release planning

From: Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Jonah H(dot) Harris" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com>, Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Bernd Helmle <mailings(at)oopsware(dot)de>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: 8.4 release planning
Date: 2009-01-27 08:49:56
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
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.

Dave Page
EnterpriseDB UK:

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Amit GuptaDate: 2009-01-27 08:59:08
Subject: Re: Table Partitioning Feature
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2009-01-27 06:41:24
Subject: Re: 8.4 release planning

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group