On Sep 16, 2005, at 4:30 PM, Russ Brown wrote:
>> just because replication is included and
>> part of the core of a database, it doesn't mean that it's reliable or
>> well tested.
I just jumped into this thread, and this statement just triggers one
thought.
Many Postgres end users rely on experts like those on this list for the
best advice on how to use Postgres and what might be the best solution
for non-core needs such as replication.
Inclusion does probably make those users feel comfort that the experts
for that particular software or product deems it one of , if not the
best solution for the given problem.
It's not always true and may not be right for this situation, since
replication needs for different situations may vary widely.
But inclusion does imply some type of endorsement.
For instance I feel pretty comfortable with TSeach2 though I don't know
much about. That fact that it comes in the contribs is an endorsement.
I'd be confused if the consensus was that there is a better, as easy to
use and license compatible full text index available and was for some
reason NOT included.
Of course, I'd still ask the list. . .
