On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 2:48 PM, Mark Mielke<m...@mark.mielke.cc> wrote: > On 08/11/2009 09:56 AM, Kevin Grittner wrote: > > Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote: > > > > OK, so it is "warm slave". > > > > That is technically accurate, given the preceding definitions, but it > has disturbing connotations. Enough so, in my view, to merit getting > a little more creative in the naming. How about "warm replica"? > Other ideas? > > I agree that the present moniker misleads. > > I remember this debate from 6 months ago. :-) > > I prefer not to try and fit square pegs into round holes. Streaming > replication sounds like the best description. It may not be the keywords > that newbies are looking for, but too bad for them. Calling it something > different than what it is, just so that people who don't understand why it > is wrong will have something that approximates the right understanding, is > not a just cause. :-)
Uhm, I think you are confused. Hot Standby = Allow read-only queries on a PostgreSQL server during archive recovery Synchronous (or Streaming) Replication = Allow WAL to be streamed on a byte level rather than copied file-by-file Hot Standby is not any sort of replication. ...Robert -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers