Joshua D. Drake wrote: > Bruce Momjian wrote: > > Tom Lane wrote: > >> "Magnus Hagander" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >>> I think this is a good reason not to list *any* of the products by name > >>> in the documentation, but instead refer to a page on say techdocs that > >>> can be more easily updated. > >> I agree with that. If we have statements about other projects in our > >> docs, we will have a problem with not being able to update those > >> statements in a timely fashion when the other projects change. > > > > I mention only Slony and pgpool as examples of replication types. They > > seem to have risen to high enough visiblity to do that. I have not > > mentioned any other solutions. > > What about Slony-II or pgpool2? Which are fundamentally different from > their v1 counterparts (o.k. slony-ii isn't out yet but still). > > I +1 that we move to have all of the replication documentation pushed to > techdocs or other facility and just have a link from the docs.
What I did was to mention Slony and pgpool as "examples", so people realize there are many other soluions. It would be good to have a companion web site that could list them all, both open source and commercial. That is going to take a lot more work, but I think would have great value, especially since our documentation will clearly outline the terms. What you don't want to do is to throw up a list and have people try to figure out what solutions they cover. -- Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
