Message-ID: <52A9E35C.3080203@commandprompt.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2013 08:25:00 -0800
From: "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>
Organization: Command Prompt, Inc.
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64;
 rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Wolfgang Keller <feliphil@gmx.net>, pgsql-general@postgresql.org
CC: pgsql-docs@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Re: postgresql.org inconsistent (Re: [GENERAL] PG replication
 across DataCenters)
References: 
 <CAD7Ssm9S__ZQCOq2GEN0G0rrs_4U6aqXiLaX0hh0Ts8JH_LY2w@mail.gmail.com>
	<A737B7A37273E048B164557ADEF4A58B17C5ED75@ntex2010i.host.magwien.gv.at>
	<52A5EB31.7070505@nybeta.com>
	<9F208972-32D3-4295-A30D-BCDAEF139E9F@silentmedia.com>
	<20131210174738.a530d930b8fd1e972d84f234@gmx.net>
	<52A74907.8040400@hogranch.com>
	<20131210202425.4e54580731cba8190987d525@gmx.net>
	<24304.1386704630@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<20131211191911.856d8850f2e3bfc6e21eca4b@gmx.net>
	<CAB7nPqQ4uq7CfsYZ3VsA7fpuFnwMVOQZYkr6-1JNnYxnxKtQdw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20131212171802.51bf444e2cb0cace64d7b256@gmx.net>
In-Reply-To: <20131212171802.51bf444e2cb0cace64d7b256@gmx.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-docs-owner@postgresql.org


On 12/12/2013 08:18 AM, Wolfgang Keller wrote:

>
>> 2. Synchronous multi-master configuration
>
> Now back to the original thread:
>
>> Knowing the number of forks/projects based on Postgres, maintaining a
>> list on a wiki list the one below is just easier for everybody:
>> http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Replication,_Clustering,_and_Connection_Pooling
>
> That one doesn't even list PostgreSQL-XC.

Then update the page? It is a wiki.

>
> For how man years has it been around now...
> Can't even remember any more.
>
> Instead it lists Postgres-R, which has been in koma for how long now...
> Can't even remember any more.

Nope, it is actively developed and sponsored by Translattice.

>
>> Perhaps this list is not completely up-to-date,
>
> To call that an understatement would be an euphemism.
>
> It's simply misleading. And misleading potential users in search of
> solutions for their needs is *bad* for the PostgreSQL project.

Why are you arguing about this instead of just fixing it?

> Guys, are you really not aware to *that* point how badly you shoot
> yourself (and the PostgreSQL project as a whole) in the foot with that
> single - wrong - phrase in the "official" documentation:
>
> "PostgreSQL does not offer this type of replication"
>
> Reading that phrase, the average O***** DBA looking for a cheaper
> replacement will stop considering PostgreSQL and that's it. You're out
> of business. They won't look any further.

I agree.

> "PostgreSQL itself does not provide this as a built-in functionality at
> the current stage, but there is an open-source "fork" freely available
> under the same license as PostgreSQL that does, for details read:
>
> http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Postgres-XC"
>
> Is that really too much work? Heck, give me write-authority on the
> documentation and I'll do it for you then. You've already wasted *way*

Submit a patch. Is that so hard? I don't understand why you are up in 
arms about this.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake


-- 
Command Prompt, Inc. - http://www.commandprompt.com/  509-416-6579
PostgreSQL Support, Training, Professional Services and Development
High Availability, Oracle Conversion, Postgres-XC, @cmdpromptinc
For my dreams of your image that blossoms
    a rose in the deeps of my heart. - W.B. Yeats


-- 
Sent via pgsql-docs mailing list (pgsql-docs@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-docs