Received: from localhost (wm.hub.org [200.46.204.128]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA8C39FA344; Tue, 24 Oct 2006 23:54:25 -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 37164-09; Wed, 25 Oct 2006 02:54:14 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from momjian.us (momjian.us [70.90.9.53]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5AEDD9FA4AE; Tue, 24 Oct 2006 23:54:14 -0300 (ADT) Received: (from bruce@localhost) by momjian.us (8.11.6/8.11.6) id k9P2sDF09727; Tue, 24 Oct 2006 22:54:13 -0400 (EDT) From: Bruce Momjian Message-Id: <200610250254.k9P2sDF09727@momjian.us> Subject: Re: Replication documentation addition In-Reply-To: <1161728082.3861.330.camel@silverbirch.site> To: Simon Riggs Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2006 22:54:13 -0400 (EDT) CC: PostgreSQL-documentation , PostgreSQL-development X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL123] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.719 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=SARE_SPEC_REPLICA, SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_PASS, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200610/64 X-Sequence-Number: 3785 Simon Riggs wrote: > On Tue, 2006-10-24 at 00:20 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > Here is a new replication documentation section I want to add for 8.2: > > > > ftp://momjian.us/pub/postgresql/mypatches/replication > > > > Comments welcomed. > > It's a very good start to a complete minefield of competing solutions. > > My first thought would be to differentiate between clustering and > replication, which will bring out many differences. I have gone with "fail-over" and "load balancing" in the updated text. > My second thought would be to differentiate between load balancing, > multi-threading, parallel query, high availability and recoverability, > which would probably sort out the true differences in the above mix. But > that wouldn't help most people and almost everybody would find fault. Yep. > IMHO most people I've spoken to take "replication" to mean an HA > solution, so perhaps we should cover it in those terms. Yes, I removed any reference to replication. It seemed too general. -- Bruce Momjian bruce@momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +