Horton

Re: 8.4 release planning

Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>, "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure@gmail.com>, "Jonah H. Harris" <jonah.harris@gmail.com>, Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com>, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>, Bernd Helmle <mailings@oopsware.de>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2009-01-27T08:49:56Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 8:12 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> writes:
>> So, some feedback to make this decision more difficult:
>
>> Users: care about HS more than anything else in the world.
>
> I don't think this is correct.  There are certainly a lot of users who
> would like an in-core replication solution, but HS by itself is not that
> --- you also need (near) real-time log shipping, which we have already
> decided to punt to 8.5.  That being the case, I think the argument
> that HS is a must-have feature for 8.4 is actually rather weak.

I don't buy that. Sure, sync-rep would be the icing on the cake, but
HS with a small archive_timeout (even of the order of 10 or 15
minutes) would have been extremely useful on a number of systems I
used to run.


-- 
Dave Page
EnterpriseDB UK:   http://www.enterprisedb.com