Re: Plans for 8.2? - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Greg Sabino Mullane
Subject Re: Plans for 8.2?
Date
Msg-id bac4ad84fea66f03d441900778e74081@biglumber.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Plans for 8.2?  (Andrew Sullivan <ajs@crankycanuck.ca>)
Responses Re: Plans for 8.2?
Re: Plans for 8.2?
List pgsql-general
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


Easy everyone. Let's not bite the newcomers too hard here.

> 2.      Define "endorse".  Does that mean "in the backend"?  So
> everyone has to pay the performance penalty even though they won't
> all use it?  Even though no other database system makes you make that
> compromise?

I would presume that at least packaged with PG (in the contrib section)
would be a good start. A prominent, east to find link to Slony on
the website would help too.

I just did a test to see what comes up when I typed "replication" in
the search box at postgresql.org. Got a 503 error. We really need to
work on that. Bad enough we don't use Postgres to do the searching.

I'd better stop here before I start ranting myself. I didn't expect
that 503 error when I started this letter.

- --
Greg Sabino Mullane greg@turnstep.com
PGP Key: 0x14964AC8 200601131734
http://biglumber.com/x/web?pk=2529DF6AB8F79407E94445B4BC9B906714964AC8

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iD8DBQFDyCt4vJuQZxSWSsgRAkXZAJ4hvwlENtOxGPh1x+vNu3++izLQCQCgsqCa
rW1MUxPxDqYFbdgontgxuwk=
=ZlIa
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: "Jim C. Nasby"
Date:
Subject: Re: Plans for 8.2?
Next
From: "Jim C. Nasby"
Date:
Subject: Re: Indexing Question