On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 4:56 PM, Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com>wrote:
> On 2014-01-28 21:48:09 +0000, Thom Brown wrote: > > On 28 January 2014 21:37, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 11:53 AM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > >> I've rebased it here and am hacking on it still. > > > > > > Andres and I are going back and forth between our respective git repos > > > hacking on this, and I think we're getting there, but I have a > > > terminological question which I'd like to submit to a wider audience: > > > > > > The point of Andres's patch set is to introduce a new technology > > > called logical decoding; that is, the ability to get a replication > > > stream that is based on changes to tuples rather than changes to > > > blocks. It could also be called logical replication. In these > > > patches, our existing replication is referred to as "physical" > > > replication, which sounds kind of funny to me. Anyone have another > > > suggestion? > > > > Logical and Binary replication? > > Unfortunately changeset extraction output's can be binary data... > Perhaps Logical and Block? The existing replication mechanism is similar to block-based disk backups. It's the whole thing (not parts) and doesn't have any concept of database/directory.
