The idea of hooks sounds quite good to me indeed. The
issue is not PR, it's indeed pgcluster benefiting from
the maintenance of postgresql and avoiding the hassle
of having to resync its code at each postgresql
change.
I will propose something along those lines once I get
a more stable pgcluster and have a better grasp at all
details of its code.
I could send a mail to the slony and gorda people at
that point to see if they're interested in
coordinating efforts.
--- Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> "Jonah H. Harris" <jonah.harris@gmail.com> writes:
> > On 8/27/06, Alvaro Herrera
> <alvherre@commandprompt.com> wrote:
> >> ... or the pgcluster group could check the hook
> list posted by the GORDA
> >> project guys. In fact IIRC that patch was
> committed already, without
> >> much discussion?
>
> > I thought the GORDA patch got turned down because
> there was no
> > communication between replication providers.
>
> Exactly; we asked for some evidence that these
> particular hook
> definitions were generally useful. So it seems like
> a joint
> pgcluster/GORDA/Slony proposal would go over a lot
> better.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
