On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 08:46:22AM -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > On Thu, 2008-05-29 at 08:21 -0700, David Fetter wrote: > > This part is a deal-killer. It's a giant up-hill slog to sell > > warm standby to those in charge of making resources available > > because the warm standby machine consumes SA time, bandwidth, > > power, rack space, etc., but provides no tangible benefit, and > > this feature would have exactly the same problem. > > > > IMHO, without the ability to do read-only queries on slaves, it's > > not worth doing this feature at all. > > The only question I have is... what does this give us that PITR > doesn't give us?
It looks like a wrapper for PITR to me, so the gain would be ease of use. Cheers, David. -- David Fetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://fetter.org/ Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter Skype: davidfetter XMPP: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Remember to vote! Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers