Re: Mentioning Slony in docs - Mailing list pgsql-docs

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: Mentioning Slony in docs
Date
Msg-id 200711081528.lA8FSYN05094@momjian.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Mentioning Slony in docs  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Mentioning Slony in docs  (Decibel! <decibel@decibel.org>)
List pgsql-docs
Tom Lane wrote:
> Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> > My understanding was that we were trying to show equal favour to all of
> > the various solutions. This was a reason not to do that.
>
> The reason for taking a "balanced approach" is that no one solution
> fits everyone's needs.  I don't think the core docs should be pushing
> Slony more than other solutions.

We do mention Slony for in-place upgrades because if its capabilities to
work across Postgres versions.

--
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://postgres.enterprisedb.com

  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

pgsql-docs by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Mentioning Slony in docs
Next
From: "Greg Sabino Mullane"
Date:
Subject: The definition of PGDG