[Gllug] Microsoft was distributing Ubuntu

[Richard Jones]

On Wed, Jul 04, 2007 at 03:32:41PM +0100, Bruce Richardson wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 04, 2007 at 03:09:42PM +0100, Richard wrote:
> > I'd argue that the lack of decent integrated replication doesn't make
> > PostgreSQL a bad DB - it functions perfectly well as an RDBMS without
> > that feature and if third parties are putting-in the effort to build
> > replication solutions then that leaves the Pg developers free to
> > concentrate on the most important bit, which is ensuring that the RDBMS
> > itself works well. Really, replication is an add-on and whilst it may be
> > essential to you and your business it's clearly not essential when
> > developing an RDBMS.
> 
> It's essential for using one, though, for anything where your salary is
> on the line.  For all the things that I don't like about MySQL, setting
> up replication is trivial and uncomplicated, as is almost every other
> aspect of the feature.

No, there is a difference here.

If you want your database to be up 24x7, then obviously you need some
sort of replication.  If on the other hand it's a casual website which
can be down for a few hours while things get restored from backups,
then replication isn't needed.

ACID compliance _is_ necessary though because without that your
database gets silently corrupted, and the corruption ends up in your
backups.

FWIW, I have found PostgreSQL to be extremely reliable, and if you
really want replication then you can probably do something with Xen &
LVM.

Rich.

-- 
Richard Jones
Red Hat
-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at gllug.org.uk
http://lists.gllug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug