Re: On "multi-master"

From: Andrew Sullivan <ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca>
To: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: On "multi-master"
Date: 2005-10-14 17:08:00
Message-ID: 20051014170800.GB20107@phlogiston.dyndns.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Sat, Oct 15, 2005 at 01:33:22AM +0900, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
>
> BTW, the reason why I myself stick with pgpool is there's no
> perfect or acceptable replication solution for PostgreSQL (please do
> not talk about RAC or MySQL Cluster. I hate them:-).

And that's part of why we're looking at it, too. Slony-I has a
target, but it's not this one.

> and has truly high-avilabilty). Maybe Slony-II is one of the hope, but
> I have no idea how the performance is...

Well, since it doesn't exist except in prototype yet, I think the
performance is pretty bad :-)

A

--
Andrew Sullivan | ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca
I remember when computers were frustrating because they *did* exactly what
you told them to. That actually seems sort of quaint now.
--J.D. Baldwin

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2005-10-14 17:08:56 Re: PostgreSQL Gotchas
Previous Message Andrew Sullivan 2005-10-14 17:06:27 Re: On "multi-master"