On Thu, 2002-08-15 at 09:53, Neil Conway wrote:
> That's exactly what I was going to say -- I'd prefer that any
> interested parties concentrate on producing a *really good*
> replication implementation, which might eventually be integrated into
> PostgreSQL itself.
>
> Producing a "generic API" for something that really doesn't need
> genericity sounds like a waste of time, IMHO.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Neil
Some how I get the impression that I've been completely misunderstood.
Somehow, people seem to of only read the subject and skipped the body
explaining the concept.
In what way would providing a generic interface to *monitor* be a "waste
of time"? In what way would that prevent someone from "producing a
*readlly good* replication implementation"? I utterly fail to see the
connection.
Regards,Greg Copeland
