From: | Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL advocacy <pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org>, PostgreSQL General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [GENERAL] The pgreplication project |
Date: | 2004-06-08 15:55:38 |
Message-ID: | 40C5E17A.2080909@Yahoo.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-advocacy pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
On 6/8/2004 11:49 AM, Robert Treat wrote:
> Well I am working to address the problem, sorry if I am not doing it
> fast enough. I spoke with the gborg maintainer and found out that the
> top 5 is based on page views for a project rather than cvs activity.
Aha ... and let me guess, the algorithm does NOT look at the
Http-Referrer to ignore the hits caused by listing it at the top, right?
> While I've no doubt you've been more active on slony development, I am
> not so sure that pgreplication doesn't get more page views. So, I have
> (just) sent Chris an email asking to reset the stats so we will see
> which project floats to the top, but I think longer term we need a
> "replication guide" listing the different solutions available like we do
> with windows and gui tools up on techdocs. I plan to do that as well,
> just need to find time to work it into the schedule.
Thanks,
Jan
>
> Robert Treat
>
> On Tue, 2004-06-08 at 08:46, Jan Wieck wrote:
>> I guess I have to address a slightly broader audience, or do I conclude
>> from the total lack of interest in this matter that nobody cares if we
>> promote something here as one of our "top five" flagship projects, that
>> is inactive for years and still a prototype implementation against
>> PostgreSQL 6.4 with no ideas how to incorporate the semantic changes of
>> MVCC into the concept.
>>
>> We might be leaning towards migrating things to pgfoundry, but that does
>> not mean that we can leave gborg behind as a half plundered wreck where
>> one by accident might still find something useful.
>>
>>
>> Jan
>>
>>
>> On 6/4/2004 8:01 AM, Jan Wieck wrote:
>>
>> > Folks,
>> >
>> > on the gborg front page is a link to the "pgreplication" project as one
>> > of five "top" projects. This thing has had zero updates since its last
>> > attempts agains PostgreSQL 7.2 and appears literally dead.
>> >
>> > Can someone please remove that?
>> >
>> >
>> > Jan
>> >
>>
>>
>> --
>> #======================================================================#
>> # It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
>> # Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
>> #================================================== JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com #
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
>> TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
>>
>> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html
>
--
#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
#================================================== JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com #
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Chris Ryan | 2004-06-08 16:09:38 | Re: [HACKERS] [GENERAL] The pgreplication project |
Previous Message | Robert Treat | 2004-06-08 15:49:32 | Re: [GENERAL] The pgreplication project |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Scot L. Harris | 2004-06-08 16:00:34 | Multiple databases on seperate drives/file systems? |
Previous Message | Robert Treat | 2004-06-08 15:49:32 | Re: [GENERAL] The pgreplication project |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Marc G. Fournier | 2004-06-08 16:03:22 | Releasing 7.4.3 ... |
Previous Message | Robert Treat | 2004-06-08 15:49:32 | Re: [GENERAL] The pgreplication project |