Re: Slony-I makes progress

From: "Jochem van Dieten" <jochemd(at)oli(dot)tudelft(dot)nl>
To: <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>
Cc: <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Slony-I makes progress
Date: 2004-03-07 19:55:16
Message-ID: 1061.130.161.198.25.1078689316.squirrel@secure.oli.tudelft.nl
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Jan Wieck said:
>
> The communication channels are "event" tables. The node daemons
> use listen and notify to send messages from on to another.
> Messages are only exchanged over this when the replication cluster
> configuration is changed or every 10 seconds to tell "new
> replication data has accumulated, come and get it". So I think
> the listen/notify protocol suits well for that.
>
> Some of the functionality happening on an event is already put
> into stored procedures, and the replication engine as well as the
> (to be) admin tools just call those. But that doesn't mean that
> using psql will do the job. There are certain operations that
> need to be
> initiated (the corresponding SP called) on a particular node, not
> just on any available one. Also, these stored procedures take
> arguments, most of which are just the ID numbers of configuration
> objects. Not the ideal user interface.

So some of the regular tasks can be performed from any of the nodes
and some need to be done from a specific node. But if connected to the
right node, they can all be done through sql and the management tool
doesn't need shell access on the nodes. Right?

> There must be some external tools. And to be integrated into any
> automated failover system, it needs to be commandline. So that one
> is a given.

Would a database function that is called from the commandline like
sudo -u postgres psql -c 'select "_MyCluster".useMaster(2,3,4);'
qualify for that?

Jochem

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2004-03-07 20:46:14 Re: 7.4.2 ... all commits in?
Previous Message Lee Kindness 2004-03-07 19:53:47 Re: Thread safe connection-name mapping in ECPG. Is it