Re: PITR Dead horse?

"Dave Page" <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk> writes:
> Ahh, that's not quite what I thought you meant. It sounded like you were
> questioning the reliability of PostgreSQL, not it's ability to be
> recovered to point of failure.

I think the waters got muddied a bit by the suggestion elsewhere in the
thread (not from Nicolai, IIRC) that we needed a mailing list to talk
about reliability issues in general. We know we need PITR to help us
become a more credible enterprise-grade database; so that discussion is
short and sweet. What people were confused about was whether there was
enough other issues to need ongoing discussion.

regards, tom lane