On 10/15/2012 4:43 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
Jan spoke at length at PgCon, for all to hear, that what we are building is a much better way than the trigger logging approach Slony uses. I don't take that as carte blanche for approval of everything being done, but its going in the right direction with an open heart, which is about as good as it gets.
The mechanism you are building for capturing changes is certainly a lot better than what Bucardo, Londiste and Slony are doing today. That much is true.
The flip side of the coin however is that all of today's logical replication systems are designed Postgres version agnostic to a degree. This means that the transition time from the existing, trigger based approach to the new WAL based mechanism will see both technologies in parallel, which is no small thing to support. And that transition time may last for a good while. We still have people installing Slony 1.2 because 2.0 (3 years old by now) requires Postgres 8.3 minimum.
Jan -- Anyone who trades liberty for security deserves neither liberty nor security. -- Benjamin Franklin -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
