On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 7:29 AM, Gauthier, Dave wrote:
> So, back to the base note, as far as native replication support, I should
> wait for v9 whic'll probably be out by the end of the summer?
Yep. You should really start testing now though if you're gonna use it.
--
Sent via pgsql-general m
On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 9:29 AM, Gauthier, Dave wrote:
> So, back to the base note, as far as native replication support, I should
> wait for v9 whic'll probably be out by the end of the summer?
for 'native' replication waiting for 9.0 is your only option, because
all of the other replication opt
On 30/04/2010 21:30, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 12:17 PM, Gauthier, Dave
> wrote:
>> I believe v9 will have native DB master/slave DB replication (correct if
>> wrong). If so, what’s the best guess on when will v9 be released?
>
> If I had to plan server deployments for the n
th; j...@commandprompt.com; Gauthier, Dave; r...@iol.ie;
pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Native DB replication for PG
On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 9:27 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> I'm curious to get to the bottom of Scott's report. It's possible that
> he hit one of the
Tom Lane wrote:
Greg Smith writes:
FYI, since December of 2009 (release of 8.4.2) there have been 10 bugs
fixed with the word "crash" in their description, as well as 7 memory
leaks that could potentially lead to crash.
Are we reading the same CVS log? I find quite a few commit messages
m
On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 9:27 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> I'm curious to get to the bottom of Scott's report. It's possible that
> he hit one of the two or three 8.4-only crashes we fixed since 8.4.1;
> or the bug may still be lurking.
I'll definitely be testing it this summer to see if it triggers a
Greg Smith writes:
> Scott Marlowe wrote:
>> I tested 8.4 what I thought was fairly hardly last year only
>> to have 8.4.1 die under the same load that 8.3 handled without a
>> problem, and reverted to the known working version putting testing
>> 8.4.1 on hold.
> FYI, since December of 2009 (rele
On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 11:33 PM, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 9:02 PM, Greg Smith wrote:
>> Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, 2010-04-30 at 13:42 -0700, Gauthier, Dave wrote:
>>>
>>
>> If I had to plan server deployments for the next year (and I do) I'd
>> be s
On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 9:02 PM, Greg Smith wrote:
> Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, 2010-04-30 at 13:42 -0700, Gauthier, Dave wrote:
>>
>
> If I had to plan server deployments for the next year (and I do) I'd
> be sticking with pg 8.3 and a proven replication engine. Next summer
2010/5/1 Devrim GÜNDÜZ :
> On Sat, 2010-05-01 at 02:59 -0400, Greg Smith wrote:
>> FYI, since December of 2009 (release of 8.4.2) there have been 10 bugs
>> fixed with the word "crash" in their description, as well as 7 memory
>> leaks that could potentially lead to crash. Even six months ago I wa
On Sat, 2010-05-01 at 02:59 -0400, Greg Smith wrote:
> FYI, since December of 2009 (release of 8.4.2) there have been 10 bugs
> fixed with the word "crash" in their description, as well as 7 memory
> leaks that could potentially lead to crash. Even six months ago I was
> still hesitant to push 8.4
On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 12:59 AM, Greg Smith wrote:
> Scott Marlowe wrote:
>>
>> I tested 8.4 what I thought was fairly hardly last year only
>> to have 8.4.1 die under the same load that 8.3 handled without a
>> problem, and reverted to the known working version putting testing
>> 8.4.1 on hold.
>
Scott Marlowe wrote:
I tested 8.4 what I thought was fairly hardly last year only
to have 8.4.1 die under the same load that 8.3 handled without a
problem, and reverted to the known working version putting testing
8.4.1 on hold.
So to ME, the choice is a fully functional 8.3 installation that ha
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
On Fri, 2010-04-30 at 13:42 -0700, Gauthier, Dave wrote:
If I had to plan server deployments for the next year (and I do) I'd
be sticking with pg 8.3 and a proven replication engine. Next summer
Surely you mean 8.4? :-)
No, I would buy the 8.3 argume
On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 2:38 PM, Raymond O'Donnell wrote:
> On 30/04/2010 21:30, Scott Marlowe wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 12:17 PM, Gauthier, Dave
>> wrote:
>>> I believe v9 will have native DB master/slave DB replication (correct if
>>> wrong). If so, what’s the best guess on when will v
On Fri, 2010-04-30 at 13:42 -0700, Gauthier, Dave wrote:
> >> On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 12:17 PM, Gauthier, Dave
> >> wrote:
> >>> I believe v9 will have native DB master/slave DB replication (correct if
> >>> wrong). If so, what's the best guess on when will v9 be released?
> >>
> >> If I had to
ss/features84.html
-Original Message-
From: Raymond O'Donnell [mailto:r...@iol.ie]
Sent: Friday, April 30, 2010 4:39 PM
To: Scott Marlowe
Cc: Gauthier, Dave; pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Native DB replication for PG
On 30/04/2010 21:30, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> On Fri
On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 12:17 PM, Gauthier, Dave
wrote:
> I believe v9 will have native DB master/slave DB replication (correct if
> wrong). If so, what’s the best guess on when will v9 be released?
If I had to plan server deployments for the next year (and I do) I'd
be sticking with pg 8.3 and
On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 2:17 PM, Gauthier, Dave wrote:
> I believe v9 will have native DB master/slave DB replication (correct if
> wrong). If so, what’s the best guess on when will v9 be released?
well, depends on how you define replication, but yes. my _guess_ on
release is late summer. the
19 matches
Mail list logo
