On 13 November 2012 06:14, Amit kapila <amit.kap...@huawei.com> wrote:

>>I get the installability thang, very very much, I just don't see the
>>single process thing as the only solution. At very least an open
>>minded analysis of the actual problem and ways of solving it is called
>>for, not just reach for a close to hand solution.
> Some other usecase where I have seen it required is in telecom billing apps.
> In telecom application where this solution works, needs other maintainence 
> connections as well.
> Some of the reasons for its use are performance and less maintainence 
> overhead and also their data requirements are
> also not so high.
> So even if this solution doesn't meet all requirements of single process 
> solution (and neither I think it is written to address all)  but can't we 
> think of it as first version and then based on requirements extend it to have 
> other capabilities:
> a. to have a mechnism for other background processes (autovacuum, checkpoint, 
> ..).
> b. more needs to be thought of..

Why would we spend time trying to put back something that is already
there? Why not simply avoid removing it in the first place?

 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:

Reply via email to