On Monday 13 August 2007 13:06, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-08-10 at 13:32 -0400, Robert Treat wrote:
> > On Friday 10 August 2007 07:47, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> > > On Fri, Aug 10, 2007 at 12:22:40PM +0100, Dave Page wrote:
> > > > I was reading the recent Slashdot thread on MySQL earlier and once
> > > > again saw a number of people saying they would use PostgreSQL except
> > > > for the lack of replication. This seems to me to be the widespread
> > > > FUD about postgres these days.
> >
> > Do you really think people dont know postgresql has replication? I find
> > it more that the general use of the term replication implies a built in
> > solution, which we do not have.
>
> Every time I attend a trade show this is the #1 question:
> "Do you have replication?"
>
I'm not denying the frequency of the question, but I've gotten that question
from people who did know about things like slony.
> We need to bear in mind that non-supporters of PostgreSQL are fairly
> vocal about the "fact" that we "dont support replication".
And these people surely know about things like slony. So we need to be
cognizant of this distinction people have with replication that is built-in
vs add-on solutions.
*shrug*
--
Robert Treat
Build A Brighter LAMP :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL