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 CA04F9FB25A for ; Tue, 29 Aug 2006 12:26:49 -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 12565-02 for ; Tue, 29 Aug 2006 12:26:39 -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 95F2F9FB24D for ; Tue, 29 Aug 2006 12:26:36 -0300 (ADT) Received: by noel.decibel.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 5324356435; Tue, 29 Aug 2006 10:26:34 -0500 (CDT) Received: (hashcash-sendmail, from uid 1001); Tue, 29 Aug 2006 10:26:33 -0500 Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2006 10:26:33 -0500 From: "Jim C. Nasby" To: Chahine Hamila Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org Subject: Re: integration of pgcluster into postgresql Message-ID: <20060829152633.GG73562@pervasive.com> References: <4D27CB1096EF1C408F4BFAB0046EC7B667D93C@ausmailid.aus.pervasive.com> <20060829141909.67115.qmail@web57102.mail.re3.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060829141909.67115.qmail@web57102.mail.re3.yahoo.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: 1:20:060829:chahine.hamila@yahoo.com::dEm1CAM6SjVLVrsj:0000000000000 0000000000000000000000002flY X-Hashcash: 1:20:060829:pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org::HfZ8lowCUZ75mJfp:000000000 0000000000000000000000002KZs 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: 200608/1864 X-Sequence-Number: 89357 On Tue, Aug 29, 2006 at 07:19:09AM -0700, Chahine Hamila wrote: > Yes, I forgot to include hackers on that mail. Anyway, > relax Jim, I'm not trying to invade anyone's turf > here. There seems to be support for the idea of > providing an interface plug for replication modules, > which is fine with me. If you have any constructive > criticism towards that, I'd be most happy to consider > it and try to find an accomodation. Well, the big challenge there is that each replication system uses a different methodology, so you're unlikely to come up with anything that would be common between any two systems. I think the best bet is to look for things that can be added that are either difficult or impossible to do outside the backend, or that have use beyond just replication. -- 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