Re: [RFC][PATCH] wal decoding, attempt #2 - Design Documents (really attached)

On Monday, October 15, 2012 09:18:57 PM Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On 15 October 2012 19:19, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> > I think Robert is right that if Slony can't use the API, it is unlikely
> > any other replication system could use it.
>
> I don't accept that. Clearly there is a circular dependency, and
> someone has to go first - why should the Slony guys invest in adopting
> this technology if it is going to necessitate using a forked Postgres
> with an uncertain future?

Well. I don't think (hope) anybody proposed making something release worthy for
slony but rather a POC patch that proofs the API is generic enough to be used
by them. If I (or somebody else familiar with this) work together with somebody
familiar with with slony internals I think such a POC shouldn't be too hard to
do.
I think some more input from that side is a good idea. I plan to send out an
email to possibly interested parties in about two weeks...

Regards,

Andres
--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services