X-Original-To: pgsql-hackers-postgresql.org@postgresql.org Received: from localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80A3A9FC326 for ; Sat, 26 Aug 2006 19:56:16 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 55728-10 for ; Sat, 26 Aug 2006 19:56:10 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from noel.decibel.org (noel.decibel.org [67.100.216.10]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B7C49FB2DD for ; Sat, 26 Aug 2006 19:56:10 -0300 (ADT) Received: by noel.decibel.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id D122356435; Sat, 26 Aug 2006 17:56:09 -0500 (CDT) Received: (hashcash-sendmail, from uid 1001); Sat, 26 Aug 2006 17:56:09 -0500 Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2006 17:56:09 -0500 From: "Jim C. Nasby" To: "Jonah H. Harris" Cc: Chahine Hamila , pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org Subject: Re: integration of pgcluster into postgresql Message-ID: <20060826225608.GK73562@pervasive.com> References: <20060825124009.3593.qmail@web57112.mail.re3.yahoo.com> <20060826012249.GF73562@pervasive.com> <36e682920608260544s50a14840qe1487d2814bd7a46@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <36e682920608260544s50a14840qe1487d2814bd7a46@mail.gmail.com> X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 6.0-RELEASE-p4 amd64 X-Distributed: Join the Effort! http://www.distributed.net User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 X-Hashcash: 1:20:060826:jonah.harris@gmail.com::Fap7PBPr0jDjMDaf:000000000000000 0000000000000000000000002Wbs X-Hashcash: 1:20:060826:chahine.hamila@yahoo.com::m8EMdZymYrfMA9Sy:0000000000000 0000000000000000000000001Xb2 X-Hashcash: 1:20:060826:pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org::Ow4I6awBgQRpcGwZ:000000000 0000000000000000000000000kGI X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.091 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=AWL X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200608/1754 X-Sequence-Number: 89247 On Sat, Aug 26, 2006 at 08:44:07AM -0400, Jonah H. Harris wrote: > >Second, pgcluster is (AFAIK) command-based replication, which has some > >very, very serious drawbacks. If PostgreSQL were to include a > >replication solution, I'd certainly hope it wouldn't be command-based. > > Support of PGCluster-I, which we're discussing here, is being dropped > in favor of the shared-disk PGCluster-II which was demonstrated at the > anniversary conference. IIRC, PGCluster-I does use command-based > replication but is merged into the parser in such a way as to make it > work quite well--unlike the man-in-the-middle approach taken by > pgpool. Ahh, I didn't realize that. Good to know. > >Finally, pgcluster is very out-of-date. The last version uses 8.0.1 and > >was released on Mar. 7, 2005. If the author can't find the time to > >maintain it, I don't see why that burden should be put on the shoulders > >of this community. > > Umm, I don't know where you're looking Jim, but the last update was > February 10, 2006 and it's for PostgreSQL 8.1.1. Frankly, it has had > a very good track record of development and bug fixes... so let's not > make assumptions on (very large PostgreSQL) projects we're unfamiliar > with. http://pgcluster.projects.postgresql.org/; the latest date I see there is Mar. 7, 2005, and the newest version is 8.0.1. -- Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby@pervasive.com Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117 vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461