From: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
Message-Id: <201005270222.o4R2Med27235@momjian.us>
Subject: Re: Londiste
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTik3rcLJ0r_vMnR4VDw4jPAOiyVpawDphkDma_s7@mail.gmail.com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 26 May 2010 22:22:40 -0400 (EDT)
CC: Francisco Reyes <lists@stringsutils.com>,
	Greg Sabino Mullane <greg@turnstep.com>, pgsql-docs@postgresql.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"

Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 5:45 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
> > Robert Haas wrote:
> >> On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 2:15 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
> >> > Francisco Reyes wrote:
> >> >> Bruce Momjian writes:
> >> >>
> >> >> > Well, I assumed "Londiste" head reached the level that we should mention
> >> >> > it, but you are right on the floodgates issue. ?We do aleady mention
> >> >> > many other replication solutions in other sections, so I didn't think
> >> >>
> >> >> Then perhaps all that is needed is to just link to the replication section
> >> >> of the wiki:
> >> >> http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Replication,_Clustering,_and_Connection_Pool
> >> >> ing
> >> >>
> >> >> A search for replication on the top of the doc page (ie
> >> >> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.4/interactive/index.html) takes to the high
> >> >> availability page, so a reference there to the wiki page may be a good idea.
> >> >
> >> > That is an excellent idea, not only for replication, but there are
> >> > probably other wiki pages that we should link to from our main docs. ?I
> >> > will go through the wiki, find appropriate pages, and add links from our
> >> > docs.
> >>
> >> I don't know that I'm eager to link from our docs to the wiki. ?That
> >> seems likely to lead to maintenance headaches. ?But on the other hand,
> >> I see no problem mentioning third-party products that are part of the
> >> PG ecosystem.
> >
> > Well, the problem is that we have more solutions that fit in the docs in
> > normal places.
> 
> Isn't that just a matter of rejiggering the page formatting a little bit?

The point is that there is a lot of replication information I don't want
to merge into that SGML page so even if we mention "Londiste", the wiki
reference is still useful.  I have the same problem with mentioning
pooling in the docs --- there is no natural place to put it, but I can
reference the wiki from the performance SGML docs.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com