On Thu, 2008-05-29 at 09:10 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: > Joshua D. Drake wrote: > > > > The only question I have is... what does this give us that PITR doesn't > > give us? > > Since people seem to be unclear on what we're proposing: > > 8.4 Synchronous Warm Standby: makes PostgreSQL more suitable for HA > systems by eliminating failover data loss and cutting failover time. >
What does this give us that Solaris Cluster, RedHat Cluster, DRBD etc.. doesn't give us? I am not trying to be a poison pill, but I am just not seeing the benefit over what solutions that already exist. I could probably argue if I had more time, that this solution doesn't do anything but make us look like we are half baked in implementation. If the real goal is read-only slaves with synchronous capability, then let's implement that. If we can't do that by 8.4 it gets pushed to 8.5. We already have a dozen different utilities to give us what is being currently proposed. Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
