| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Jonah H(dot) Harris" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, "Andreas Pflug" <pgadmin(at)pse-consulting(dot)de>, "Chahine Hamila" <chahine(dot)hamila(at)yahoo(dot)com>, "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: integration of pgcluster into postgresql |
| Date: | 2006-08-27 19:44:16 |
| Message-ID: | 9776.1156707856@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Jonah H. Harris" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On 8/27/06, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
>> ... or the pgcluster group could check the hook list posted by the GORDA
>> project guys. In fact IIRC that patch was committed already, without
>> much discussion?
> I thought the GORDA patch got turned down because there was no
> communication between replication providers.
Exactly; we asked for some evidence that these particular hook
definitions were generally useful. So it seems like a joint
pgcluster/GORDA/Slony proposal would go over a lot better.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Glaesemann | 2006-08-27 23:31:06 | Interval month, week -> day |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-08-27 19:18:14 | Re: Tricky bugs in concurrent index build |