Re: Changeset Extraction v7.3
От | Thom Brown |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Changeset Extraction v7.3 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAA-aLv7tP7Hnh-SE=HmDAytjD5cB5Z6JQiar+Tj+mHpKNq4hqQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Changeset Extraction v7.3 (Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 28 January 2014 21:56, Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > On 2014-01-28 21:48:09 +0000, Thom Brown wrote: >> On 28 January 2014 21:37, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: >> > On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 11:53 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> I've rebased it here and am hacking on it still. >> > >> > Andres and I are going back and forth between our respective git repos >> > hacking on this, and I think we're getting there, but I have a >> > terminological question which I'd like to submit to a wider audience: >> > >> > The point of Andres's patch set is to introduce a new technology >> > called logical decoding; that is, the ability to get a replication >> > stream that is based on changes to tuples rather than changes to >> > blocks. It could also be called logical replication. In these >> > patches, our existing replication is referred to as "physical" >> > replication, which sounds kind of funny to me. Anyone have another >> > suggestion? >> >> Logical and Binary replication? > > Unfortunately changeset extraction output's can be binary data... "system"? "cluster"? "full"? "complete"? -- Thom
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: