From: | Selena Deckelmann <selenamarie(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Web team help for beta release |
Date: | 2010-05-02 20:08:45 |
Message-ID: | z2r2b5e566d1005021308q745ec46z96208427535558b5@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-www |
On Sun, May 2, 2010 at 11:22 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> On Sun, May 2, 2010 at 1:10 PM, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> wrote:
>>>> The phrase "read-only replication" reads oddly to me. Isn't the
>>>> normal term "single master"?
>>>
>>> I've been using the phrase "binary replication" which is what's really new.
>
>> As opposed to what? ASCII replication?
>
> It's not the replication that's read-only, it's the queries executed on
> the slaves. I haven't read the proposed docs but it sounds like this
> is confusing two features that would be better explained separately,
> viz
>
> * built-in simple replication
>
> * ability to execute read-only queries on a replication slave server
>
> (in this context, "simple" really means "all or nothing", as compared
> to stuff like Slony that can replicate subsets of a database)
I like that. Even though it means a bit more explanation, I think it
is very clear. Update:
http://etherpad.opensourcebridge.org/postgresql-beta-release-balloon
-selena
--
http://chesnok.com/daily - me
http://endpoint.com - work
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Devrim GÜNDÜZ | 2010-05-02 23:26:52 | Re: Web team help for beta release |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2010-05-02 18:22:24 | Re: Web team help for beta release |