From: | Hans-Jürgen Schönig <postgres(at)cybertec(dot)at> |
---|---|
To: | Chris Travers <chris(at)travelamericas(dot)com>, pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: MySQL 5 comparison |
Date: | 2005-01-10 08:54:08 |
Message-ID: | 41E242B0.5010708@cybertec.at |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-advocacy |
Chris Travers wrote:
> One explenation regarding the replication issue....
>
>>
>> lucent(at)schankserver:~/replication_tests/query$ cat 05.sql
>> BEGIN;
>> UPDATE t_one SET intvalue = id WHERE id = 'RANDOMINT';
>> UPDATE t_one SET intvalue = id WHERE id = 'RANDOMINT';
>> COMMIT;
>>
>> BEGIN;
>> DELETE FROM t_one WHERE id = 'RANDOMINT';
>> ROLLBACK;
>>
> Where is Randomint calculated? If it is on the server, I would expect
> the replication to provide unpredictable results with MySQL as it
> replicates statements rather than tuples. Personally, I think
> statement-based replication is a bit of a no-no because if you are doing
> complex non-deterministic queries, this will generate inconsistant results.
It is done by my benchmarking tool.
They do query based replication? Oh man, that really sucks ...
Hans
--
Cybertec Geschwinde u Schoenig
Schoengrabern 134, A-2020 Hollabrunn, Austria
Tel: +43/660/816 40 77
www.cybertec.at, www.postgresql.at
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Francois Suter | 2005-01-10 09:17:52 | First article in France about PostgreSQL v8 |
Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2005-01-09 18:53:44 | Re: OSCON Committee |