On Wed, 2006-11-22 at 20:31 +0100, Markus Schiltknecht wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Jeff Davis wrote:
> > Nothing's wrong with that approach. My prediction, however, is that:
> >
> > (1) Similar replication solutions will first agree on some common hooks
> > they need in the backend that may have no actual SQL syntax associated,
> > and get patches in
>
> Well, before that, you need to know what hooks you need. And that again
> involves lots of implementation details. Thus better first implement
> without hooks, otherwise you might later notice that there is something
> you didn't think of.
I think you misunderstand my point. I was talking about replication
implementations that already exist. They already have patches on the
backend that are necessary for their solution to work.
The idea is to design a single set of hooks that can be used to
implement an entire class of replication. This only makes sense after
existing solutions come to some agreement. I view that as a first step,
assuming that it is necessary to alter the core in order to implement
the class of replication in question.
Once that step is complete, ideally you'd be able to implement Postgres-
R without having to patch the postgresql backend to accomplish it
(except for maybe adding the syntax for your solution). Then, when a
syntax is agreed upon, you won't need to patch the backend at all. Isn't
that the goal, to be able to implement your replication without patching
the backend?
Regards,Jeff Davis
