On Tuesday February 25 2003 11:52, Tom Lane wrote:
> Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com> writes:
> > On Tue, 2003-02-25 at 22:44, Ed L. wrote:
> >> And do I understand correctly the replication to be eventually
> >> included will be an embedded syncronous replication solution
> >> based on Postgres-R and the Spread GCS?
> >
> > No, I don't think that's set in stone (although I can't speak for
> > the core team). While I think Postgres-R is promising, there
> > might be room for additional replication implementations that
> > cater to different sets of requirements.
>
> There absolutely *is* room for multiple replication
> implementations. AFAICS there's no one-size-fits-all approach. I
> did and still do like Postgres-R as a pretty useful approach, but
> it should not be mistaken for The One True Path.
That's good to hear. We're looking for an asyncronous, non-embedded,
master-slave replication solution. Among 7 pgsql replication
projects I've reviewed lately, the best prospects right now appear to
be rserv (testing it now) or failing that, some enhancements to
DBMirror. Is there any near consensus among the core developers on
the best open source asyncronous solution as of today?
Ed
