Received: from localhost (wm.hub.org [200.46.204.128]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A45F9FB2BB; Tue, 24 Oct 2006 20:58:29 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.128]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 10105-09; Tue, 24 Oct 2006 23:58:24 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from noel.decibel.org (noel.decibel.org [67.100.216.10]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1771C9FB206; Tue, 24 Oct 2006 20:58:23 -0300 (ADT) Received: by noel.decibel.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 2E54756427; Tue, 24 Oct 2006 18:58:22 -0500 (CDT) Received: (hashcash-sendmail, from uid 1001); Tue, 24 Oct 2006 18:58:14 -0500 Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2006 18:58:14 -0500 From: "Jim C. Nasby" To: "Joshua D. Drake" Cc: Simon Riggs , Markus Schiltknecht , josh@agliodbs.com, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org, Bruce Momjian , PostgreSQL-documentation Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Replication documentation addition Message-ID: <20061024235814.GY26892@nasby.net> References: <200610240339.k9O3dYh19144@momjian.us> <200610241137.47486.josh@agliodbs.com> <453E681A.3000004@bluegap.ch> <453E6AB9.4000200@commandprompt.com> <1161727538.3861.320.camel@silverbirch.site> <453E900E.4010603@commandprompt.com> <1161728414.3861.338.camel@silverbirch.site> <453E949F.90004@commandprompt.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <453E949F.90004@commandprompt.com> X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 6.1-RELEASE-p10 amd64 X-Distributed: Join the Effort! http://www.distributed.net User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) X-Hashcash: 1:20:061024:jd@commandprompt.com::Thj5WNQnPFtnWV+w:00000000000000000 0000000000000000000000003wAH X-Hashcash: 1:20:061024:simon@2ndquadrant.com::hKSHeonrgJ/Xcjbu:0000000000000000 0000000000000000000000002A0I X-Hashcash: 1:20:061024:markus@bluegap.ch::jmUs5J5SAabG33ve:00000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000002bPB X-Hashcash: 1:20:061024:josh@agliodbs.com::PunOliiM0V8et4zz:00000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000006iWx X-Hashcash: 1:20:061024:pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org::CKqRmk1WUug3F1mg:000000000 000000000000000000000000254G X-Hashcash: 1:20:061024:bruce@momjian.us::tYDu78UWo6BUQwnk:01KzD X-Hashcash: 1:20:061024:pgsql-docs@postgresql.org::3D7F0FcgoOs6aDzM:000000000000 0000000000000000000000006/Tl X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.72 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=SARE_SPEC_REPLICA X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200610/59 X-Sequence-Number: 3780 On Tue, Oct 24, 2006 at 03:33:03PM -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > Simon Riggs wrote: > > On Tue, 2006-10-24 at 15:13 -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > > > >> If it were me, I would say that the replication option has to be > >> specific to PostgreSQL (e.g; cjdbc or synchronous jakarta pooling > >> doesn't go in). > > > > ...and how do you define PostgreSQL exactly? > > I replication product or software defined to work with only PostgreSQL? AFAIK Continuent's product fails that test... I don't see any reason to exclude things that work with databases other than PostgreSQL, though I agree that replication that's actually in the application space (ie: it ties you to TomCat or some other platform) probably doesn't belong. My feeling is that people reading this chapter are looking for solutions and probably don't care as much about how exactly the solution works so long as it meets their needs. > I know there are some other products out there that will work from one > db to another, but I am not sure if those would be considered HA > solutions or migration solutions (which we could certainly document). -- Jim Nasby jim@nasby.net EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com 512.569.9461 (cell)