From: | gonzales(at)linuxlouis(dot)net |
---|---|
To: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
Cc: | Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info>, Kenneth Downs <ken(at)secdat(dot)com>, nikolay(at)samokhvalov(dot)com, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Slightly OT. |
Date: | 2007-06-01 15:00:29 |
Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.64.0706011059070.4547@mx1.linuxlouis.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Fri, 1 Jun 2007, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> gonzales(at)linuxlouis(dot)net wrote:
>> Group,
>> I have to admit, I'm a little disappointed. I'm a HUGE advocate of
>> PostgreSQL(to state for the record) - in fact I always keep my eyes peeled
>> for opportunities to recommend it in my day to day business.
>>
>> So why am I disappointed, and who really cares?
>>
>> I'm disappointed because SLONY-II has not been released yet to support
>> multi-master replication! PostgreSQL is going through all of the releases
>> - and that's great - BUT, where is the sync-up with the powerhouse of a
>> component, that Slony-II would bring to the table? Slony-I is pretty
>> sweet, but if Slony-II would release, I can imagine that this would
>> introduce some major competition in the enterprise world against the
>> commercial dyno's.
>
> Which databases ship with multi-master replication?
I dunno, which ones?
Which ones have robust and fully functional multi-master replication?
(Oracle, MS SQL, not-PostgreSQL).
>
> Joshua D. Drake
>
>
>
>
--
Louis Gonzales
louis(dot)gonzales(at)linuxlouis(dot)net
http://www.linuxlouis.net
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alexander Staubo | 2007-06-01 15:00:41 | Re: Slightly OT. |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2007-06-01 15:00:12 | Re: Autovacuum keeps vacuuming a table disabled in pg_autovacuum |