On 20 June 2012 21:19, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 5:47 AM, Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >> The idea that logical rep is some kind of useful end goal in itself is >> slightly misleading. If the thought is to block multi-master >> completely on that basis, that would be a shame. Logical rep is the >> mechanism for implementing multi-master. > > If you're saying that single-master logical replication isn't useful, > I disagree. Of course, having both single-master and multi-master > replication together is even more useful.
> But I think getting even > single-master logical replication working well in a single release > cycle is going to be a job and a half. OK, so your estimate is 1.5 people to do that. And if we have more people, should they sit around doing nothing? > Thinking that we're going to > get MMR in one release is not realistic. If you block it, then the above becomes true, whether or not it starts true. You may not want MMR, but others do. I see no reason to prevent people from having it, which is what you suggest. -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
