Chris Browne wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (chinni) writes:
> > Postgres-R is a multi server (write anywhere) replication tool
> > which is possibly important for any enterprise if they want to shift
> > to postgres.
> >
> > Did you guys debate on merging it.
>
> I seem to recall there being a
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (chinni) writes:
> Postgres-R is a multi server (write anywhere) replication tool
> which is possibly important for any enterprise if they want to shift
> to postgres.
>
> Did you guys debate on merging it.
I seem to recall there being a licensing issue; Postgres-R uses the
chinni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Did you guys debate on merging it.
Yes.
If it were actually synced with our current CVS and potentially
mergeable, the debate might have been longer :-(. But in point of fact,
postgres-R has never been less than two releases behind in the past five
years, and
See http://www.slony.org/
It's a master-multislave replication system that has a pretty robust
development cycle. It just reached a 1.0 release.
Whether any solution becomes a core part of the distribution remains, I
think, to be seen.
-tfo
On Jul 27, 2004, at 4:03 AM, chinni wrote:
Postg
Postgres-R is a multi server (write anywhere) replication tool
which is possibly important for any enterprise if they want to shift
to postgres.
Did you guys debate on merging it.
As of now They are working on postgres 7.2 and developing postgres-R.
They plan to do it for 7.4 as well, why n
