Re: [DOCS] Replication documentation addition
От | Bruce Momjian |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [DOCS] Replication documentation addition |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 200610261559.k9QFxv129610@momjian.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [DOCS] Replication documentation addition ("Jim C. Nasby" <jim@nasby.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: [DOCS] Replication documentation addition
Re: [DOCS] Replication documentation addition |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Jim C. Nasby wrote: > On Wed, Oct 25, 2006 at 08:42:07PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > Jim C. Nasby wrote: > > > Something else worth doing though is to have a paragraph explaining why > > > there's no built-in replication. I don't have time to write something > > > right now, but I can do it later tonight if no one beats me to it. > > > > I thought that was implied in the early paragraph about why there are > > many solutions. > > I think we should explicitely spell it out, especially considering how > many times people ask about it. How about... > > This multitude of choices is why PostgreSQL does not ship with a > replication solution by default; any bundled solution would only > satisfy a subset of replication needs. The problem is that we do have some solutions in our code, like doing data partitioning in the application, warm standby, or using a shared disk for failover, so how do we spell that out? I say there are multiple solutions, but I don't see how I can say that all are external and not included. -- Bruce Momjian bruce@momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: