Andrew Sullivan wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 25, 2006 at 11:05:34AM -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>> Actually I don't buy this argument. The only major change in
>
> Ok, good. So why isn't Postgres-R something we have _now_?
That's is a good question and as I mentioned, I don't know much about
Postgres-R. My point was directly to the argument that a fast moving
PostgreSQL somehow limits the ability for replication to be built. That
argument, I believe is false.
I originally responded to the rest of your email but thought better of
it. The only thing I can say is, my experience is that something like
replication will only be productively completed, outside the community.
Jan, for the most part created his own community with Slony. Postgres-R
is doing the same as is the others such as pgPool.
The nature that they are all their own communities, not to mention
several closed source products (Replicator, Unicluster) pretty much sets
the whole thing up to fail IMHO.
Otherwise you are just hearding cats.
Joshua D. Drake
>
> A
>