From: | Andrew Sullivan <andrew(at)libertyrms(dot)info> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Proposal for a cascaded master-slave replication system |
Date: | 2003-11-13 15:01:07 |
Message-ID: | 20031113150107.GF25144@libertyrms.info |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Nov 11, 2003 at 03:38:53PM -0500, Christopher Browne wrote:
> In the last exciting episode, JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com (Jan Wieck) wrote:
> > I look forward to your comments.
>
> It is not evident from the paper what approach is taken to dealing
> with the duplicate key conflicts.
>
> The example:
>
> UPDATE table SET col1 = 'temp' where col = 'A';
> UPDATE table SET col1 = 'A' where col = 'B';
> UPDATE table SET col1 = 'B' where col = 'temp';
It's not a problem, because as the proposal states, the actual SQL is
to be sent in order to the slave. That is, only consistent sets are
sent: you can't have a condition on the slave that never could have
obtained on the master. This means greater overhead for cases where
the same row is altered repeatedly, but it's safe.
A
--
----
Andrew Sullivan 204-4141 Yonge Street
Afilias Canada Toronto, Ontario Canada
<andrew(at)libertyrms(dot)info> M2P 2A8
+1 416 646 3304 x110
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrew Sullivan | 2003-11-13 15:03:54 | Re: [HACKERS] Proposal for a cascaded master-slave replication system |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2003-11-13 14:58:33 | Re: RHEL |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrew Sullivan | 2003-11-13 15:03:54 | Re: [HACKERS] Proposal for a cascaded master-slave replication system |
Previous Message | Rod Taylor | 2003-11-13 14:59:41 | Re: ALTER TABLE modifications |