Re: real multi-master replication?

On Sunday 04 March 2007 21:28, Bill Moran wrote:
> Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc> wrote:
> > Bill Moran wrote:
> > > Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc> wrote:
> > >> Bill Moran wrote:
> > >>> "hubert depesz lubaczewski" <depesz(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > >>>> hi,
> > >>>> i read about some replication system for postgresql, but - as far as
> > >>>> i know there is none real multi-master replication system for
> > >>>> postgresql.
> > >>>> all i have seen are based on "query replication" with various
> > >>>> "hacks" for specific constructions (like now()).
> > >>>> my question is - is there any (even fully commercial) multi-master
> > >>>> replication system for postgresql that will work with all possible
> > >>>> constructs, triggers, random data and so on?
> > >>>> i mean - i dont want to bother with choosing to 'note' somehow that
> > >>>> 'this particular query' has to be replicated somehow.
> > >>>> i'm thinking about working solution that will allow multi-master
> > >>>> connections.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> anything? anywhere?
> > >>>
> > >>> Have you looked at pgpool?
> > >>
> > >> afaik pgpool is statement based and not really multimaster either ...
> > >
> > > Well, it's multi-master to the degree that all servers are read/write,
> > > and therefore any server can take over.
> >
> > not sure I follow - pgpool will simply replay the queries to each
> > backend-server that are going through it.
>
> I guess I'm comparing it to Slony, which has a clear delineation between
> master and slave. With pgpool, you don't have the failover procedure in
> the same way, in that each server can be read/write at all times.
>

This is typically reffered to as dual master (you have two unsynchronized
master servers), though the terminology is so mixed up these days none of it
is really clear.

--
Robert Treat
Build A Brighter LAMP :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL