From: | Ow Mun Heng <Ow(dot)Mun(dot)Heng(at)wdc(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Chris Browne <cbbrowne(at)acm(dot)org> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: replication in Postgres |
Date: | 2008-01-03 01:02:36 |
Message-ID: | 1199322156.4569.3.camel@neuromancer.home.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Mon, 2007-11-26 at 12:39 -0500, Chris Browne wrote:
> jlar310(at)gmail(dot)com ("Jeff Larsen") writes:
> Unfortunately, the only way to make things deterministic (or to get
> from "near real time" to "*GUARANTEED* real time") is to jump to
> synchronous replication, which is not much different from 2PC (Two
> Phase Commit), and which is certain to be prohibitively expensive
> across a WAN.
>
2PC is costly and will make things slow overall if there ever was issues
with the WAN. And to alleviate that, I believe one would have to get a
dedicated WAN line just for the syncing process. Expensive.. Anyone can
Spell S-L-A??
> At this point, I tend to get visions of Tom Cruise telling Jack
> Nicholson, "I want real time replication!", and getting the response:
> "You can't HANDLE real time replication!"
Woo.. I like this movie. _best_ court scene _ever_!
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Ow Mun Heng | 2008-01-03 01:04:39 | Re: Read-only availability of a standby server? |
Previous Message | Usama Dar | 2008-01-03 00:41:04 | Re: PITR - filter by database? |