On Tue, 2010-05-04 at 16:34 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: > On 5/4/10 4:26 PM, Greg Smith wrote: > > > > Not the database's problem to worry about. Document that time should be > > carefully sync'd and move on. I'll add that. > > Releasing a hot standby which *only* works for users with an operational > ntp implementation is highly unrealistic. Having built-in replication > in PostgreSQL was supposed to give the *majority* of users a *simple* > option for 2-server failover, not cater only to the high end. Every > administrative requirement we add to HS/SR eliminates another set of > potential users, as well as adding another set of potential failure > conditions which need to be monitored.
+1 Joshua D. Drake -- PostgreSQL.org Major Contributor Command Prompt, Inc: http://www.commandprompt.com/ - 503.667.4564 Consulting, Training, Support, Custom Development, Engineering -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
