On 8/12/2004 11:35 PM, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> We are *not* releasing Slony ... nor is Slony "the first replication
> solution" ... hell, it isn't even the first *open source* replication
> solution, as I believe that pgReplication has that distinction ...
>
> Replication for PostgreSQL is *not* a new thing ... its not something that
> is first available in 8.0.0, but has been available since 7.2 ... if it
> were something new, fine, touting that we've finally got a replication
> solution is good. But replication is *old news*, plain and simple ...
And yet people are asking "does it have replication now" ... maybe it
wasn't enough to propagate some data under severe limitations without
any idea how to add advanced features like switchover and slave
inheritance on failover in the future. People have evaluated what we
have touted out as "replication solution" and came to the conclusion
that this is no solution for them. Considering the time eRServer, rserv,
dbmirror and all the others are released by now, the number of users and
the vitality of the projects are not backing your statement that
"replication is old news".
Every time PostgreSQL is discussed, be that slashdot or LWN or other
forums or even interviews with any of out competitors, the statement is
"doesn't have replication". If we avoid the topic in our 8.0 press
release and leave out the word replication, instead of pointing to the
reasons why it is *better not to have replication builtin*, we will
lose. People will read the press release, don't see the word
replication, so "No Replication - checkmark".
Jan
--
#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
#================================================== JanWieck@Yahoo.com #
