| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andrew Sullivan <ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca> |
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: On "multi-master" |
| Date: | 2005-10-13 18:30:11 |
| Message-ID: | 24533.1129228211@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Andrew Sullivan <ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca> writes:
> On Thu, Oct 13, 2005 at 10:53:51AM -0700, Chris Travers wrote:
>> Now, what about PgPool as a multimaster sync replication solution? Sure
>> it is statement level.... But is there any reason why you cannot have
>> multiple PgPool instances running against a number of DB servers?
> Well, to begin with, you have a serious race condition:
> pgpool begins T1 on M1 and M2.
> Someone logs into M2 and does some work in T2.
> M1 completes the work of T1.
> M2 completes the work of T2.
> pgpool issues COMMIT.
> M1 replies with the COMMIT.
> M2 detects a deadlock when T2 tries to COMMIT.
> Now what?
This particular issue is fixable as of 8.1: pgpool should be using
2-phase commit.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Chris Travers | 2005-10-13 18:33:52 | Re: PostgreSQL Gotchas |
| Previous Message | Tino Wildenhain | 2005-10-13 18:29:54 | Re: PostgreSQL 8.1 vs. MySQL 5.0? |