From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
Cc: pgsql-docs@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Mentioning Slony in docs
Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2007 10:22:48 -0500
Message-ID: <24570.1194535368@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1194513961.4251.193.camel@ebony.site>
References: <1194509440.4251.180.camel@ebony.site>
<200711081010.14464.peter_e@gmx.net>
<1194513961.4251.193.camel@ebony.site>
Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> 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.
regards, tom lane
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-docs@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, simon@2ndquadrant.com, peter_e@gmx.net
Subject: Re: Mentioning Slony in docs
In-Reply-To: <24570.1194535368@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox