 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nicolai Tufar [mailto:ntufar@pisem.net] 
> Sent: 05 February 2004 00:01
> To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] PITR Dead horse? 
> 
> Totally agree. Robustness and rock-solidness are the only 
> things missing for PostgreSQL to become the killer of certain 
> commercial enterprise databases out there.

Well I've only been using PostgreSQL since 1997 and the *only* release I
ever had problems with was 6.3.2. We also use(d) Informix SE, DB2,
Unidata and SQL Server and only Informix and Unidata come close to the
robustness of PostgreSQL - and they're not the ones we need to worry
about.

Now I'm not saying we shouldn't be continually looking to improve
things, but I don't think this is quite the problem you imply.

Regards, Dave.

Thu, 5 Feb 2004 07:57:14 -0000
"Dave Page" <dpage@vale-housing.co.uk>
Re: PITR Dead horse? 
Dave Page wrote:
>  
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Nicolai Tufar [mailto:ntufar@pisem.net] 
> > Sent: 05 February 2004 00:01
> > To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
> > Subject: Re: [HACKERS] PITR Dead horse? 
> > 
> > Totally agree. Robustness and rock-solidness are the only 
> > things missing for PostgreSQL to become the killer of certain 
> > commercial enterprise databases out there.
> 
> Well I've only been using PostgreSQL since 1997 and the *only* release I
> ever had problems with was 6.3.2. We also use(d) Informix SE, DB2,
> Unidata and SQL Server and only Informix and Unidata come close to the
> robustness of PostgreSQL - and they're not the ones we need to worry
> about.
> 
> Now I'm not saying we shouldn't be continually looking to improve
> things, but I don't think this is quite the problem you imply.

I assume he was talking about the lack of data recovery in cases of hard
drive failure --- we now require you restore from backup or use a
replicated machine/drive setup.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

Thu, 5 Feb 2004 09:34:44 -0500 (EST)
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
Re: PITR Dead horse?
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Dave Page wrote:
> >  
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Nicolai Tufar [mailto:ntufar@pisem.net] 
> > > Sent: 05 February 2004 00:01
> > > To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
> > > Subject: Re: [HACKERS] PITR Dead horse? 
> > > 
> > > Totally agree. Robustness and rock-solidness are the only 
> > > things missing for PostgreSQL to become the killer of certain 
> > > commercial enterprise databases out there.
> > 
> > Well I've only been using PostgreSQL since 1997 and the *only* release I
> > ever had problems with was 6.3.2. We also use(d) Informix SE, DB2,
> > Unidata and SQL Server and only Informix and Unidata come close to the
> > robustness of PostgreSQL - and they're not the ones we need to worry
> > about.
> > 
> > Now I'm not saying we shouldn't be continually looking to improve
> > things, but I don't think this is quite the problem you imply.
> 
> I assume he was talking about the lack of data recovery in cases of hard
> drive failure --- we now require you restore from backup or use a
> replicated machine/drive setup.

I retract this email.  He clearly was talking about PostgreSQL
reliability, and Dave is right, it is pretty much a non-issue, though
maybe mindshare needs some help.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

Thu, 5 Feb 2004 10:07:42 -0500 (EST)
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
Re: PITR Dead horse?