On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 3:19 AM, Wolfgang Keller <feliphil(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:
>> >> postgresql-xc is not postgresql, its a fork.
>>
>> > It would at least merit being mentioned in the doc, just like other
>> > "forks" or whatever you may call it, as long as they're open-source.
>>
>> You seem to not realize how many forks of Postgres there are.
>
> I had mentioned just one.
>
> And that one does not only fill in a functionality gap that is pretty
> important when it comes to competition/advocacy vs. e.g. that database
> with the capital "O", but it is also mentioned already on
> postgresql.org.
>
> Honestly, don't try to tell me that the majority of the developers
> working on PostgreSQL are not aware of PostgreSQL-XC.
>
>> There's no way that we can even track them all, let alone cater
>> for them in our documentation.
>
> Just putting one single URL into the doc instead of the misleading
> statement that there's no such thing should have been less work than
> replying to me.
Knowing the number of forks/projects based on Postgres, maintaining a
list on a wiki list the one below is just easier for everybody:
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Replication,_Clustering,_and_Connection_Pooling
Perhaps this list is not completely up-to-date, but not adding that in
the core documentation facilitates the work of core maintainers. It
gives you all the information you need as well.
Regards,
--
Michael