On Sat, Aug 26, 2006 at 08:44:07AM -0400, Jonah H. Harris wrote: > >Second, pgcluster is (AFAIK) command-based replication, which has some > >very, very serious drawbacks. If PostgreSQL were to include a > >replication solution, I'd certainly hope it wouldn't be command-based. > > Support of PGCluster-I, which we're discussing here, is being dropped > in favor of the shared-disk PGCluster-II which was demonstrated at the > anniversary conference. IIRC, PGCluster-I does use command-based > replication but is merged into the parser in such a way as to make it > work quite well--unlike the man-in-the-middle approach taken by > pgpool. Ahh, I didn't realize that. Good to know.
> >Finally, pgcluster is very out-of-date. The last version uses 8.0.1 and > >was released on Mar. 7, 2005. If the author can't find the time to > >maintain it, I don't see why that burden should be put on the shoulders > >of this community. > > Umm, I don't know where you're looking Jim, but the last update was > February 10, 2006 and it's for PostgreSQL 8.1.1. Frankly, it has had > a very good track record of development and bug fixes... so let's not > make assumptions on (very large PostgreSQL) projects we're unfamiliar > with. http://pgcluster.projects.postgresql.org/; the latest date I see there is Mar. 7, 2005, and the newest version is 8.0.1. -- Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant [EMAIL PROTECTED] Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117 vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
