On Wed, Oct 25, 2006 at 04:42:17PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Dawid Kuroczko wrote:
> > Bruce, I've read Your documentation and I was left a bit with a feeling
> > that it's a bit too generic. It's almost as if it could be about just about
> > any major database, not PostgreSQL specific. I feel that, when I'm
> > reading PostgreSQL docs I would like to know how to set up multi-master
> > replication with PostgreSQL not an explanation what a multi-master
> > replication is. It's not about the actual documentation content, but rather
> > on accents distribution. Now it is something like: "These are the types
> > of replication solutions possible, some of them can be done with PostgreSQL",
> > I think it should be rather: "With PostgreSQL and some third-party tools you
> > can achieve such and such replication solutions, oh and by the way, research
> > is done on such and such replication method, but it's not a production quality
> > yet".
> >
> > And I try to think as my DBA-mates would do if they read the documentation,
> > I'm not sure they would end up enlighted after reading the docs -- thay would
> > probably say: "hey, I knew that, it's well structured there, but I
> > still don't know
> > what should I use", or maybe "where can I read something about this slony
> > thing anyway?".
>
> Well, the idea is to have a web site that lists all the solutions that
> can be updated regularly, perhaps using the categories from the
> documentation.
And the docs should point to that page, prominently (presumably that
will happen after the page actually exists).
Something else worth doing though is to have a paragraph explaining why
there's no built-in replication. I don't have time to write something
right now, but I can do it later tonight if no one beats me to it.
--
Jim Nasby jim@nasby.net
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com 512.569.9461 (cell)
