On 2013-05-08 14:31, Maarten van Baarsel wrote:
> On 08-05-2013 01:03:31, Alex Yurchenko wrote:
>> On 2013-05-08 01:33, Maarten van Baarsel wrote:
>>> Is it relevant for PXC or should I just forget it exists?
>>>
>>>
http://www.codership.com/wiki/
>>
>> It is pretty much the same as with code. They take our patch and port
>> it to
>> their code, potentially making own changes. I'm not sure it is up to
>> us to say
>> that you should forget it exists. But perhaps it is up to Percona if
>> they feel
>> that theirs is more adequate.
>
> I had no intention to insult anyone, I apologize profusely if I did
> so.
By god, I just pointed out the proper authority there. It is for
Percona to decide whether information in Codership's wiki is no longer
relevant to their product.
What we can be certain about is that Percona aims to make their
documentation no less (and at times more) comprehensive than our wiki.
So it is unlikely that you will find any revelations in our wiki. But,
naturally, all new features are described here first.
> It's just that PXC talks about Galera 2.x and I cannot seem to find a
> mention
> to that in the codership wiki, at all. So I was confused.
User visible Galera behaviour changed only incrementally since 0.7
release, so there was no pressing need to rewrite everything for 2.x.
PXC pretty much started with 2.x.
Oops, that page didn't see much maintenance in years. Thanks for
pointing that out. Did some ad-hoc hack'n'slashing,
galera_parameters_0.8 is no more. But it is still a mess.
> It's just that I sometimes see "mandatory" things in Percona blogposts
> [2],[1]
> that are new to me (having read the wiki) so I was wondering what the
> definitive manual was. But I see now that the wiki has been extended a
> lot
> since I've read it last, thanks.
Percona posts are likely to be more comprehensive than simple
reference, and reflect recommended practice. They may contain some
errors as well, but normally those are ironed out.
Hardly. The rest are mostly for debugging.