pg.ddx.io pgsql-docs@postgresql.org mailing list archive
help / color / mirror / Atom feedMentioning Slony in docs
6+ messages / 5 participants
[nested] [flat]
* Mentioning Slony in docs
@ 2007-11-08 08:10 Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Simon Riggs @ 2007-11-08 08:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-docs
IMHO it would be appropriate to provide better links to Slony from
within the Postgres docs.
The main reason is that Slony is Copyrighted PGDG, so we own the code
and it is of course BSD licenced.
Now that this has been highlighted to me, I can't see a reason for the
previous balanced approach.
--
Simon Riggs
2ndQuadrant http://www.2ndQuadrant.com
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Mentioning Slony in docs
@ 2007-11-08 09:10 Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
parent: Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Peter Eisentraut @ 2007-11-08 09:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-docs; +Cc: Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>
Am Donnerstag, 8. November 2007 schrieb Simon Riggs:
> The main reason is that Slony is Copyrighted PGDG, so we own the code
> and it is of course BSD licenced.
Why is that a reason for mentioning it more prominently? Is "code ownership"
a relevant property?
--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Mentioning Slony in docs
@ 2007-11-08 09:26 Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>
parent: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Simon Riggs @ 2007-11-08 09:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>; +Cc: pgsql-docs
On Thu, 2007-11-08 at 10:10 +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, 8. November 2007 schrieb Simon Riggs:
> > The main reason is that Slony is Copyrighted PGDG, so we own the code
> > and it is of course BSD licenced.
>
> Why is that a reason for mentioning it more prominently?
It's not, I'm assuming you'd actually like to see it more prominent.
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.
--
Simon Riggs
2ndQuadrant http://www.2ndQuadrant.com
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Mentioning Slony in docs
@ 2007-11-08 15:22 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
parent: Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Tom Lane @ 2007-11-08 15:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>; +Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>; pgsql-docs
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
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Mentioning Slony in docs
@ 2007-11-08 15:28 Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
parent: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Bruce Momjian @ 2007-11-08 15:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>; +Cc: Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>; Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>; pgsql-docs
Tom Lane wrote:
> 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.
We do mention Slony for in-place upgrades because if its capabilities to
work across Postgres versions.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://postgres.enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Mentioning Slony in docs
@ 2007-11-15 17:11 Decibel! <decibel@decibel.org>
parent: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Decibel! @ 2007-11-15 17:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>; +Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>; Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>; Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>; pgsql-docs
On Nov 8, 2007, at 9:28 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> 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.
>
> We do mention Slony for in-place upgrades because if its
> capabilities to
> work across Postgres versions.
I'm pretty sure Skytools/Londiste works across versions too.
Presumably, any replication that's not based on binary format should
work.
--
Decibel!, aka Jim C. Nasby, Database Architect decibel@decibel.org
Give your computer some brain candy! www.distributed.net Team #1828
Attachments:
smime.p7s (application/pkcs7-signature, 2.5K) download
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2007-11-15 17:11 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox mbox.gz follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2007-11-08 08:10 Mentioning Slony in docs Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>
2007-11-08 09:10 ` Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
2007-11-08 09:26 ` Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>
2007-11-08 15:22 ` Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
2007-11-08 15:28 ` Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
2007-11-15 17:11 ` Decibel! <decibel@decibel.org>
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