X-Original-To: pgsql-general-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.2]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 657A2D1BB74 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 2004 11:18:21 -0300 (ADT) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (neptune.hub.org [200.46.204.2]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 66065-09 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 2004 11:18:24 -0300 (ADT) Received: from mail.michaelchaney.com (mail.michaelchaney.com [207.65.84.68]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA820D1B579 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 2004 11:18:19 -0300 (ADT) Received: from pcp08698233pcs.500ash01.tn.comcast.net (fractal.trailer) [69.137.114.17] by mail.michaelchaney.com with esmtp (Exim 4.20 #1 (FreeBSD)) id 1BGex0-0006GF-Ef; Thu, 22 Apr 2004 09:13:14 -0500 Received: from mdchaney by fractal.trailer with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1BGf1w-0000un-00 for ; Thu, 22 Apr 2004 09:18:20 -0500 Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2004 09:18:20 -0500 From: Michael Chaney To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Replication Message-ID: <20040422141820.GD3433@michaelchaney.com> References: <20040420115108.GC29715@phlogiston.dyndns.org> <40869207.8020509@Yahoo.com> <20040421172803.GA325@phlogiston.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i Organization: Michael Chaney Consulting Corporation X-URL: http://www.michaelchaney.com/ X-MailScanner-Information: Please see http://www.michaelchaney.com/mail/spam.php for more information X-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam (whitelisted), SpamAssassin (score=-4.9, required 5, autolearn=not spam, BAYES_00 -4.90) X-MailScanner-From: mdchaney@michaelchaney.com X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at postgresql.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 tagged_above=0.0 required=5.0 tests= X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200404/850 X-Sequence-Number: 60092 On Wed, Apr 21, 2004 at 10:08:07PM -0400, Christopher Browne wrote: > or something more modern, like Tuxedo; if they're using MySQL as a > step up from MS Access, ^^ That's spelled "down". Access is almost 100% SQL-92 compliant, allows subselects, and does pretty good query optimization. MySQL has nothing on it. And, no, I'm not some Microsofty. Michael -- Michael Darrin Chaney mdchaney@michaelchaney.com http://www.michaelchaney.com/