Re: User documentation vs Official Docs

Greetings,

* Alvaro Herrera (alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com) wrote:
> I don't see why we need this thread to continue. This sounds like
> somebody looking for a solution when they don't yet know what the
> problem is.
>
> If people want to contribute, there are already some places where they
> can do so. Articles can be drafted in the wiki initially or, heck, even
> sites like StackOverflow[1], and if something gets to a level so great
> that they think it should be enshrined in DocBook, they can turn it into
> a documentation patch.

+1. I'd personally like to see improvements to the tutorials, and
patches could certainly be submitted or specific ideas discussed over on
-docs.

A few ideas around that would be:

- Setting up async replication
- Setting up sync replication, with quorum-based sync
- Cascading replication
- Parallel pg_dump-based backup/restore (with pg_dumpall for globals)
- Using various important extensions (pg_stat_statements,
pg_buffercache, pageinspect, pg_freespacemap, pg_visibility)
- Using pg_basebackup to build replicas
- Using pg_receivewal to have a WAL archive

Of course, there's a lot of additional tutorials that would be nice to
have which go beyond what's in core and leverage tools like pgbouncer,
pgbackrest, patroni, etc, but they'd go on the wiki or elsewhere since
they would be necessairly referring to bits that are outside of PG core.

Thanks!

Stephen