On Tue, 2010-10-05 at 10:41 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > Much of the engineering we are doing centers around use cases that are > considerably more complex than what most people will do in real life.
Why are we doing it then? What I have proposed behaves identically to Oracle Maximum Availability mode. Though I have extended it with per-transaction settings and have been able to achieve that with fewer parameters as well. Most importantly, those settings need not change following failover. The proposed "standby.conf" registration scheme is *stricter* than Oracle's Maximum Availability mode, yet uses an almost identical parameter framework. The behaviour is not useful for the majority of production databases. Requesting sync against *all* standbys is stricter even than the highest level of Oracle: Maximum Protection. Why do we think we need a level of strictness higher than Oracle's maximum level? And in the first release? -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
