Re: Standard replication interface?

Greg Copeland <greg@CopelandConsulting.Net> writes:
> In what way would providing a generic interface to *monitor* be a
> "waste of time"?

As I said -- I don't really see the need for a bunch of replication
implementations, and therefore I don't see the need for a generic API
to make the whole mess (slightly) more manageable.

> In what way would that prevent someone from "producing a readlly
> good* replication implementation"?

It wouldn't -- it's just that if/when such an implementation exists
and everyone who needs replication is using it, a "generic monitoring
API" would be pointless.

Cheers,

Neil

-- 
Neil Conway <neilconway@rogers.com>
PGP Key ID: DB3C29FC