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

Re: Support for Slony 2.0?

From: Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org>
To: Peter Geoghegan <peter(dot)geoghegan86(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info>, Devrim GÜNDÜZ <devrim(at)gunduz(dot)org>, pgadmin-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Support for Slony 2.0?
Date: 2011-01-20 21:28:13
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgadmin-hackers
A wizard as you suggest has been on my "if only i had the time and
energy" todo list for a few years :-)

On 1/20/11, Peter Geoghegan <peter(dot)geoghegan86(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Why don't we have a wizard-type facility to generate a Slonik script,
> rather than calling the "bare-metal" functions ourselves? That could
> potentially be much more useful. The reason that the existing
> facilities are a bit of a chore to use when you get past a couple of
> nodes is that paths and listens have to be individually managed, and
> the number involved increases quadratically with respect to the number
> of nodes. In other words, it's a GUI analogue of writing a Slonik
> script, as opposed to a higher level facility that usefully abstracts
> details away.
> I could imagine this really helping with complicated Slony setups
> involving daisy-chaining.
> --
> Regards,
> Peter Geoghegan
> --
> Sent via pgadmin-hackers mailing list (pgadmin-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:

Dave Page
Twitter: @pgsnake

EnterpriseDB UK:
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to


pgadmin-hackers by date

Next:From: Guillaume LelargeDate: 2011-01-20 22:06:39
Subject: Support for pg_stat_database_conflicts and pg_stat_replication
Previous:From: Guillaume LelargeDate: 2011-01-20 20:39:47
Subject: Re: Support for Slony 2.0?

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