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

Donate to the PostgreSQL Project:

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?


Reply via email to