Re: How hard would a "no global server" version be?

From: Rob Browning <rlb(at)cs(dot)utexas(dot)edu>
To: Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: How hard would a "no global server" version be?
Date: 2000-08-29 05:25:08
Message-ID: 877l90k5aj.fsf@raven.localnet
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu> writes:

> Not specifically. Postgres is a full-up database, and afaik there isn't
> a contingent of our developer community which is sufficiently interested
> to pursue "mini" configurations. But...

Well perhaps I'll become that contingent :>

> Of course we'd prefer that people realize that everything in the
> world would be better if they just had a Postgres server running
> 24x7 ;)

No doubt, but perhaps the "mini" configuration might be an insidious
method of initiating the corruption leading to the "one true way".

--
Rob Browning <rlb(at)cs(dot)utexas(dot)edu> PGP=E80E0D04F521A094 532B97F5D64E3930

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Thomas Lockhart 2000-08-29 05:38:50 Re: How hard would a "no global server" version be?
Previous Message Rob Browning 2000-08-29 05:22:02 Re: How hard would a "no global server" version be?