Bruce Momjian wrote: > Tom Lane wrote: >> "Magnus Hagander" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>> I think this is a good reason not to list *any* of the products by name >>> in the documentation, but instead refer to a page on say techdocs that >>> can be more easily updated. >> I agree with that. If we have statements about other projects in our >> docs, we will have a problem with not being able to update those >> statements in a timely fashion when the other projects change. > > I mention only Slony and pgpool as examples of replication types. They > seem to have risen to high enough visiblity to do that. I have not > mentioned any other solutions.
What about Slony-II or pgpool2? Which are fundamentally different from their v1 counterparts (o.k. slony-ii isn't out yet but still). I +1 that we move to have all of the replication documentation pushed to techdocs or other facility and just have a link from the docs. Joshua D. Drake -- === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. === Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240 Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 http://www.commandprompt.com/ Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq