Обсуждение: Replication docs update
Our chapter, "Comparison of Different Solutions", needs an update to use our new streaming replication terminology, and an update to mention the synchronous option. Patch attached. I would like to apply it to head and 9.1. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. +
Вложения
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 22:26, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote: > Our chapter, "Comparison of Different Solutions", needs an update to use > our new streaming replication terminology, and an update to mention the > synchronous option. > > Patch attached. I would like to apply it to head and 9.1. Is it really a good idea to remove the name "hot standby" where you've done so? It's a term that's pretty well set by now. Maybe instad "hot standby using transaction log replication" instead of taking it away completely? (And i'm sure Thom will find a bunch of typos, but there is no way around that I think..) -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 12:01:34PM +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote: > On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 22:26, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote: > > Our chapter, "Comparison of Different Solutions", needs an update to use > > our new streaming replication terminology, and an update to mention the > > synchronous option. > > > > Patch attached. I would like to apply it to head and 9.1. > > Is it really a good idea to remove the name "hot standby" where you've > done so? It's a term that's pretty well set by now. Maybe instad "hot > standby using transaction log replication" instead of taking it away > completely? Well, hot/warm standby is really a side-feature of replication, not a replication technology itself. WAL streaming is a replication technology. For example, Shared Disk Failover is technically a warm standby too. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. +
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 16:44, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 12:01:34PM +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote: >> On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 22:26, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote: >> > Our chapter, "Comparison of Different Solutions", needs an update to use >> > our new streaming replication terminology, and an update to mention the >> > synchronous option. >> > >> > Patch attached. I would like to apply it to head and 9.1. >> >> Is it really a good idea to remove the name "hot standby" where you've >> done so? It's a term that's pretty well set by now. Maybe instad "hot >> standby using transaction log replication" instead of taking it away >> completely? > > Well, hot/warm standby is really a side-feature of replication, not a > replication technology itself. WAL streaming is a replication True. I'm just saying it's a term that many are familiar with, and thus removing it doesn't entirely help. Removing PITR is a good idea however :-) > technology. For example, Shared Disk Failover is technically a warm > standby too. Pretty sure Shared Disk qualifies as cold standby. -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 05:06:27PM +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote: > On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 16:44, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 12:01:34PM +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote: > >> On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 22:26, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote: > >> > Our chapter, "Comparison of Different Solutions", needs an update to use > >> > our new streaming replication terminology, and an update to mention the > >> > synchronous option. > >> > > >> > Patch attached. I would like to apply it to head and 9.1. > >> > >> Is it really a good idea to remove the name "hot standby" where you've > >> done so? It's a term that's pretty well set by now. Maybe instad "hot > >> standby using transaction log replication" instead of taking it away > >> completely? > > > > Well, hot/warm standby is really a side-feature of replication, not a > > replication technology itself. WAL streaming is a replication > > True. I'm just saying it's a term that many are familiar with, and > thus removing it doesn't entirely help. Removing PITR is a good idea > however :-) Well, the term doesn't help describe what it is, so familiar doesn't help us much. > > technology. For example, Shared Disk Failover is technically a warm > > standby too. > > Pretty sure Shared Disk qualifies as cold standby. Why is it cold? It can start up right away. What does warm mean then? -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. +
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 05:26:43PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Our chapter, "Comparison of Different Solutions", needs an update to use > our new streaming replication terminology, and an update to mention the > synchronous option. > > Patch attached. I would like to apply it to head and 9.1. Applied to head. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. +