| From: | Austin Gonyou <austin(at)coremetrics(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | ntufar(at)pisem(dot)net |
| Cc: | "'Dave Page'" <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: PITR Dead horse? |
| Date: | 2004-02-05 20:15:26 |
| Message-ID: | 1076012126.3139.34.camel@localhost.localdomain |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 2004-02-05 at 14:00, Nicolai Tufar wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Dave Page [mailto:dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk]
> > My SQL2K servers give me far more sleepless nights than PostgreSQL
> ever
> > did!
>
> You bet! I totally agree with you.
> Technicians like you, me and most people on this list
> Already know that PostgreSQL is stable and reliable.
> It is management that needs to be convinced, and for this
> we need to have PITR in feature list.
>
> > Regards, Dave.
As previously stated by Bruce I believe, the mindshare department needs
some work. For this, the PITR is a necessity, but also when comparing
features with other DBs that people and businesses are currently
familiar with.
--
Austin Gonyou <austin(at)coremetrics(dot)com>
Coremetrics, Inc.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Chester Kustarz | 2004-02-05 20:17:15 | Re: [PATCHES] log session end - again |
| Previous Message | Nicolai Tufar | 2004-02-05 20:00:43 | Re: PITR Dead horse? |