Sigh. This old chestnut. On Fri, Jan 13, 2006 at 03:15:06PM +0100, Mikael Carneholm wrote: > > Citing Baldur Norddahl > (http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general/2006-01/msg00597.php): > > "I will also point out that none of the replication solutions have > the same solid reputation as postgresql. As long the postgresql > team will not endorse a replication solution, you can not expect > people to put the same trust in these solutions as we put into > postgresql itself." 1. Define "postgresql team". What, CORE members? Like Jan, perhaps? Or maybe you mean active developers? Like the ones doing the coding on the project? 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? 3. Define "solid reputation". Does this mean "has been around 10 years?" I gots news for you: until the pg_timemachine module is ready, we're not going to be able to add things retrospectively to the history of Postgresql. And does this mean that WAL isn't solid, because it's not 10 years old? Hmm. What about PITR? 4. Define "trust". You mean that people are just picking up Postgres and using it because it has a good reputation, and doing no testing? Well, I wish them lots of luck, whatever system they use. If you think there is something wrong with some bit of code, in Slony or any other project, it would be _really nice_ to see a proposal to fix it, rather than claim that there's some magic "in the core" bit that is somehow the thing which makes code reliable. Or, if you think that there is some all-others-killing set of packages that needs to be put together as a world-domination solution, please start a project on pgfoundry to build the integrated distribution. That's what free software is for. If the complaint is instead, "Company O and Company I have big giant marketing departments that turn 85 modules into 85*85 different products! How come we don't?" then I suggest you have failed to grasp exactly where the strengths of community based development lie. (I'm also more than a little impatient with people who moan about how this or that replication system isn't a substitute for Oracle's RAC orgrid computing or whatever. I guess we oughta get to work, eh? A Mere Matter of Programming, that one. But I think I've ranted enough.) A -- Andrew Sullivan | ajs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx When my information changes, I alter my conclusions. What do you do sir? --attr. John Maynard Keynes
