Re: Plans for 8.2?

From: "Greg Sabino Mullane" <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com>
To: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Plans for 8.2?
Date: 2006-01-13 22:39:06
Message-ID: bac4ad84fea66f03d441900778e74081@biglumber.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Easy everyone. Let's not bite the newcomers too hard here.

> 2. Define "endorse". Does that mean "in the backend"? So
> everyone has to pay the performance penalty even though they won't
> all use it? Even though no other database system makes you make that
> compromise?

I would presume that at least packaged with PG (in the contrib section)
would be a good start. A prominent, east to find link to Slony on
the website would help too.

I just did a test to see what comes up when I typed "replication" in
the search box at postgresql.org. Got a 503 error. We really need to
work on that. Bad enough we don't use Postgres to do the searching.

I'd better stop here before I start ranting myself. I didn't expect
that 503 error when I started this letter.

- --
Greg Sabino Mullane greg(at)turnstep(dot)com
PGP Key: 0x14964AC8 200601131734
http://biglumber.com/x/web?pk=2529DF6AB8F79407E94445B4BC9B906714964AC8

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iD8DBQFDyCt4vJuQZxSWSsgRAkXZAJ4hvwlENtOxGPh1x+vNu3++izLQCQCgsqCa
rW1MUxPxDqYFbdgontgxuwk=
=ZlIa
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jim C. Nasby 2006-01-13 22:39:38 Re: Indexing Question
Previous Message Jim C. Nasby 2006-01-13 22:26:39 Re: Plans for 8.2?