On 22.01.2013 15:02, Dimitri Fontaine wrote:
> Phil Sorber<phil@omniti.com> writes:
>> What do you think about the idea of a full WAL proxy? Probably not for
>> 9.3 at this point though.
>
> I was thinking that a WAL proxy nowadays is called a cascading standby
> with local archiving enabled. I'm not sure why you would want to trust
> your archiving and WAL relaying to another piece of software…
You might not want to keep a copy of the whole data directory around, as
you have to in a cascading standby. I can see value in a separate WAL
proxy software, especially if it's integrated into a larger backup
manager program like barman or wal-e.
- Heikki
