From: | "Shridhar Daithankar<shridhar_daithankar(at)persistent(dot)co(dot)in>" <shridhar_daithankar(at)persistent(dot)co(dot)in> |
---|---|
To: | <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Using RSYNC for replication? |
Date: | 2003-01-29 10:48:24 |
Message-ID: | 200301291618.24951.shridhar_daithankar@persistent.co.in |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Wednesday 29 Jan 2003 2:35 pm, you wrote:
> > If it can't do this, then it damn well should. Move clogs and WALs into
> each
> > database's directory so each is isolated. Put a call into Postgres (psql
> > function) to catch up on the logs. Then lock every table from writes
> (JIC),
> > perform the backup, unlock every table.
>
> Maybe you should consider using mysql if that is what you want. Mysql
> works that way. Each database is entirely encapsulated in it's own
> directory.
Well, postgresql has each database in it's own directories but WAL and clog
are shared. If you want them distint, run different database site on same
machine.
That would be like oracle. Minimum 4 processes per database. To put it
politely, I don't like it.
Shridhar
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Patrick Fiche | 2003-01-29 11:07:28 | Re: Getting results from a dynamic query in PL/pgSQL |
Previous Message | Curt Sampson | 2003-01-29 10:28:20 | Re: Status of tablespaces |