Re: PostgreSQL in the press again
От | Simon Riggs |
---|---|
Тема | Re: PostgreSQL in the press again |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1100035692.4442.387.camel@localhost.localdomain обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: PostgreSQL in the press again ("Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@postgresql.org>) |
Ответы |
Re: PostgreSQL in the press again
|
Список | pgsql-advocacy |
On Tue, 2004-11-09 at 19:00, Marc G. Fournier wrote: > On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, Josh Berkus wrote: > > > Guys, > > > >>> What are the other solutions? > >> > >> Mammoth Replicator, and whatever is happening with eRServer these > >> days... > > > > dbMirror is still quite popular. This is partly because it is better suited > > for "very slow replication", e.g. replication via FTP server once per day, a > > la MusicBrainz. > > > > Both pgPool and C-JDBC offer synchronous query distribution based MM > > replication, although at the present time neither is transaction-safe. When > > we get XA, C-JDBC will become a very viable alternative. > > > > The issue talking with the press is that you need to communicate to them that > > "Replication" is a general programming topic, and NOT a single task, just > > like "database" is. Nobody in the industry would expect to use the same > > database for all purposes; neither would anyone expect to use the same > > replication tool for all purposes. The reason you get this question all the > > time is: > > 1) Many DBMSs (SQL Server, MySQL) support only one replication tool; > > 2) reporters have no clear idea what "replication" is. > > > > Personally, I'd answer: > > > > "Slony-I is undoubtedly our most popular replication tool. It supports > > Master-Slave High Availability Replication. However, there are a number of > > other solutions, such as dbMirror, eRServer, pgPool, C-JDBC, and the > > proprietary Mammoth Replicator, all of which are in wide use because they > > solve different replication problems than Slony-I does. Replication is not a > > single solution for a single problem; it is several solutions for a wide > > array of different problems. That's why no one replication tool will ever be > > the "default" replication for PostgreSQL." > > This answer almost sounds perfect for inclusion into the FAQ itself ... > Agreed. > That's why no one replication tool will ever be > > the "default" replication for PostgreSQL." > Externally, everybody thinks that there should be just one, just like there is for other databases. That was the feedback from various PostgreSQL reference sites and that's why I was asked the question. Anyway, trying to summarise these things for PR soundbites is hard and I'll just have to put up with everybody thinking I know jack. :-) Here's the link just now... http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/applications/0,39020384,39173013,00.htm -- Best Regards, Simon Riggs
В списке pgsql-advocacy по дате отправления: