Re: Core team statement on replication in PostgreSQL

Robert Treat <xzilla@users.sourceforge.net> writes:
> 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.  

Actually, it's the "easy to use" piece that's near the front of my own
priority list.  In any case, the expectation that we can get the log
shipping fixed sooner than we can get read-only slaves has nothing to do
with the relative desirability of the pieces; it's a technical judgment
based on what we can see of the problems' difficulty.
        regards, tom lane