Re: Core team statement on replication in PostgreSQL

Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-05-29 at 17:42 -0400, Robert Treat wrote:
>
>   
>> I would have thought the read only piece would have been more important than 
>> the synchronous piece. In my experience readable slaves is the big selling 
>> point in both Oracle and MySQL's implementations, and people are not nearly 
>> as concerned if there is a small asynchronous window.  
>>     
>
> The read only piece is the more important piece from a market
> perspective. 
>
>
>   

You must be gauging a different market from the one I'm in. I have just 
come back from a meeting with a (quite technically savvy) customer who 
was quite excited by the news and saw the possibility of read-only 
slaves as a nice to have extra rather than a must-have-or-it's-not-worth 
anything feature.

I'm really quite astounded and rather saddened by the waves of 
negativity I have seen today.

cheers

andrew