| From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Chris Bitmead <chrisb(at)nimrod(dot)itg(dot)telstra(dot)com(dot)au> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)hub(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: postgres 7.2 features. |
| Date: | 2000-07-11 00:58:44 |
| Message-ID: | 200007110058.UAA07506@candle.pha.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
WAL is 7.1. It doesn't affect the storage manager very much. A new
storage manager is scheduled for 7.2.
>
> > I can understand reluctance to install whatever.0 as a production
> > server on its first day of release. But we have enough field experience
> > now with 7.0.* to say confidently that it is more stable than 6.5.*,
> > and we know for a fact that we have fixed hundreds of bugs in it
> > compared to 6.5.*. Frankly, if I had to bet today, I'd bet on 7.1.*
> > being less stable than 7.0.*, at least till we shake out all the
> > implications of TOAST, WAL, etc.
>
> Is WAL planned for 7.1? What is the story with WAL? I'm a bit concerned
> that the current storage manager is going to be thrown in the bit bucket
> without any thought for its benefits. There's some stuff I want to do
> with it like resurrecting time travel, some database replication stuff
> which can make use of the non-destructive storage method etc. There's a
> whole lot of interesting stuff that can be done with the current storage
> manager.
>
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Chris Bitmead | 2000-07-11 01:05:04 | Re: Alternative new libpq interface. |
| Previous Message | Chris Bitmead | 2000-07-11 00:53:04 | Re: postgres fe/be protocol |