Message-ID: <44F2B242.60807@bluegap.ch>
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2006 11:07:14 +0200
From: Markus Schiltknecht <markus@bluegap.ch>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.5 (X11/20060812)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Robert Treat <xzilla@users.sourceforge.net>
CC: pgsql-docs@postgresql.org, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>,
	Chris Browne <cbbrowne@acm.org>, pgman@candle.pha.pa.us
Subject: Re: Replication Documentation
References: <44E9B95D.1030209@bluegap.ch>
	<200608271539.09297.xzilla@users.sourceforge.net>
In-Reply-To: <200608271539.09297.xzilla@users.sourceforge.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Robert Treat wrote:
> On Monday 21 August 2006 09:47, Markus Schiltknecht wrote:
>> has there been a consensus about where a replication document should go
>> and what it should cover?
 >
> I think the general idea is to toss it on techdocs... like the GUI Tools 
> page... http://www.postgresql.org/docs/techdocs.54

Hm. I didn't know that one. There is already a section about 
replication. Chris, do you agree to put your article there?

But AFAIK the goal of our discussion was to put _something_ into the 
official documentation to make it better visible. Lots of people ask for 
replication solutions, but up to now there is no official statement. So 
newcomers need to google around, figure out about lots of different 
projects, partly dead ones, etc...

If we put an extensive replication article in the techdocs, we need to 
link it somehow from the main documentatino, IMHO. Otherwise it probably 
won't help that much.

Regards

Markus