On Thu, 29 May 2008, David Fetter wrote:
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.
This is an interesting commentary on the priorities of the customers you're selling to, but I don't think you can extrapolate from that too much. The deployments I normally deal with won't run a system unless there's a failover backup available, period, and the fact that such a feature is not integrated into the core yet is a major problem for them. Read-only slaves is a very nice to have, but by no means a prerequisite before core replication will be useful to some people. Hardware/machine resources are only worth a tiny fraction of what the data is in some environments, and in some of those downtime is really, really expensive.
-- * Greg Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.gregsmith.com Baltimore, MD -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
