| From: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, Mark Mielke <mark(at)mark(dot)mielke(dot)cc>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: "Hot standby"? |
| Date: | 2009-08-11 20:22:43 |
| Message-ID: | b42b73150908111322w1e5e59cfs677df34ca2250b1e@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 4:07 PM, Josh Berkus<josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> wrote:
> All,
>
> So really, the "streaming replication" patch should be called "hot
> standby", and the "hot standby" patch should be called "read only slaves"?
>
> And *why* can't we call it log-based replication?
+1
*) it _is_ used to replicate a database (replicate means make a copy!)
*) our target market will perceive it that way
*) sounds cool
'synchronous log-based replication'
'asynchronous log-based replication'
or,
'log-based replication', in both synchronous and asynchronous modes
merlin
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2009-08-11 20:38:55 | Re: dependencies for generated header files |
| Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2009-08-11 20:07:05 | Re: "Hot standby"? |