Re: replication: PG vs My

> On Tuesday 15 July 2003 07:38 pm, Martin Sarsale wrote:
> > Dear all: we're trying to choose a db for our site. We're a little bit
> > worried about the load of the server so we were thinking in some kind of db
> > cluster.
> >
> > Mysql has a built-in way to do this but I found that pg relies on external
> > utilities. How good are they? Are they ready for production-servers?
> >
>
> Well, there are a lot of external replication solutions available, so saying how good they are depends on which one your discussing. I have heard anectdotal evidence about all (most anyway) of them being used in production situations, but I don't think any of them have had extensive testing. There is a commercial replication solution that has had extensive enterprise use available at http://www.erserver.com/. The company plans to open source it "real soon now" but as of yet you need a commercial license for it (which comes with support, so might be a good deal for you).

we only want free (as in speech) software :)

which solution would you recommend?

> I also have to mention that postgresql tends to scale a lot better than mysql so youre far less likely to need replication for scaleability, especially in multi-user, multi-write type environments. This is one of the reasons that it's taken so long for postgresql to get a "built in" replication solution, the need isn't strong enough to get the itch scratched.

we don't exactly know how much users/querys we'll have, but we're afraid of having problems with only one DB server. Probably will never add another DB server, but we would like to have the chance to do it, if we want to.