Joshua D. Drake wrote:
On Thu, 2008-05-29 at 17:42 -0400, Robert Treat wrote:
I would have thought the read only piece would have been more important than
the synchronous piece. In my experience readable slaves is the big selling
point in both Oracle and MySQL's implementations, and people are not nearly
as concerned if there is a small asynchronous window.
The read only piece is the more important piece from a market
perspective.
You must be gauging a different market from the one I'm in. I have just
come back from a meeting with a (quite technically savvy) customer who
was quite excited by the news and saw the possibility of read-only
slaves as a nice to have extra rather than a must-have-or-it's-not-worth
anything feature.
I'm really quite astounded and rather saddened by the waves of
negativity I have seen today.
cheers
andrew
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
