Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.182]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA7709FCB83 for ; Thu, 8 Nov 2007 11:28:52 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.182]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 09971-08-2 for ; Thu, 8 Nov 2007 11:28:25 -0400 (AST) Received: from momjian.us (momjian.us [70.90.9.53]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AFE8D9FCB85 for ; Thu, 8 Nov 2007 11:28:41 -0400 (AST) Received: (from bruce@localhost) by momjian.us (8.11.6/8.11.6) id lA8FSYN05094; Thu, 8 Nov 2007 10:28:34 -0500 (EST) From: Bruce Momjian Message-Id: <200711081528.lA8FSYN05094@momjian.us> Subject: Re: Mentioning Slony in docs In-Reply-To: <24570.1194535368@sss.pgh.pa.us> To: Tom Lane Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2007 10:28:34 -0500 (EST) CC: Simon Riggs , Peter Eisentraut , pgsql-docs@postgresql.org X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL124 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200711/13 X-Sequence-Number: 4546 Tom Lane wrote: > Simon Riggs writes: > > My understanding was that we were trying to show equal favour to all of > > the various solutions. This was a reason not to do that. > > The reason for taking a "balanced approach" is that no one solution > fits everyone's needs. I don't think the core docs should be pushing > Slony more than other solutions. We do mention Slony for in-place upgrades because if its capabilities to work across Postgres versions. -- Bruce Momjian http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://postgres.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +