| From: | Bill Moran <wmoran(at)collaborativefusion(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bo Lorentsen <bl(at)netgroup(dot)dk> |
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Replication and PITR |
| Date: | 2006-09-21 15:39:06 |
| Message-ID: | 20060921113906.40c5dee1.wmoran@collaborativefusion.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
In response to Bo Lorentsen <bl(at)netgroup(dot)dk>:
> Hi ...
>
> I have been trying to find a replication to a payment system at the
> company I work, and Slony-I is of cause the first thing that game into
> my attention. But when reading chapter 23.3 in the PG manual, there is
> this comment of PITR used as a replication tool.
>
> I also saw the "pgpitrha" project, and this sounds really nice too, but
> is this a good way to go ? Will PITR be more replication friendly
> in the future or even form the basis for a future buildin async
> replication form ?
>
> I may be naive, but to me it sound like we/I only need some kind of
> protocol (or API in postgres) to move PITR data from one server to
> another, and we could end up with a nice async replication system.
>
> pros :
> - DDL replications
> - low overhead
> - no trickers
>
> Cons:
> - binary alike master slave
- No reliability. On slow days, WAL logs could take a long time to
rotate, so small but important transactions might not be replicated
for a long time.
--
Bill Moran
Collaborative Fusion Inc.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Scott Marlowe | 2006-09-21 15:48:47 | Re: postgresql rising |
| Previous Message | Bo Lorentsen | 2006-09-21 15:30:24 | Replication and PITR |