On Thu, 2008-05-29 at 09:10 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> >
> > The only question I have is... what does this give us that PITR doesn't
> > give us?
>
> Since people seem to be unclear on what we're proposing:
>
> 8.4 Synchronous Warm Standby: makes PostgreSQL more suitable for HA
> systems by eliminating failover data loss and cutting failover time.
>
What does this give us that Solaris Cluster, RedHat Cluster, DRBD etc..
doesn't give us? I am not trying to be a poison pill, but I am just not
seeing the benefit over what solutions that already exist. I could
probably argue if I had more time, that this solution doesn't do
anything but make us look like we are half baked in implementation.
If the real goal is read-only slaves with synchronous capability, then
let's implement that. If we can't do that by 8.4 it gets pushed to 8.5.
We already have a dozen different utilities to give us what is being
currently proposed.
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (
pgsql-hackers@...)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
