| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Cc: | Mathias Brossard <mathias(dot)brossard(at)opentrust(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Subject: | Re: Core team statement on replication in PostgreSQL |
| Date: | 2008-05-29 20:12:54 |
| Message-ID: | 200805292212.55391.peter_e@gmx.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-advocacy pgsql-hackers |
Mathias Brossard wrote:
> From what I gather from those slides it seems to me that the NTT solution
> is synchronous not asynchronous. In my opinion it's even better, but I do
> understand that others might prefer asynchronous. I'm going to speculate,
> but I would think it should be possible (without a substancial rewrite) to
> support both modes (or even some intermediate modes, like DRBD on Linux).
Well, we already have asynchronous. The whole point is adding synchronous.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2008-05-29 20:14:14 | Re: Core team statement on replication in PostgreSQL |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2008-05-29 20:10:13 | Re: Core team statement on replication in PostgreSQL |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2008-05-29 20:14:14 | Re: Core team statement on replication in PostgreSQL |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2008-05-29 20:10:13 | Re: Core team statement on replication in PostgreSQL |