| From: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl>, Hans-Jürgen Schönig <postgres(at)cybertec(dot)at>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, eg(at)cybertec(dot)at |
| Subject: | Re: Constant WAL replay |
| Date: | 2005-04-25 00:06:00 |
| Message-ID: | 426C3468.7090805@commandprompt.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
>>
>>Very close. We don't use the WAL (yet, slated for probably 8.1) but we
>>do use a transaction log shipping method. So the implementation is
>>almost the same.
>
>
> Can you run queries on the slave? If so, how do you handle xid collisions?
You can run any query that does not modify data on a replicated table.
You can run any non data modifying query on any of the tables.
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2005-04-25 01:18:13 | Re: Constant WAL replay |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2005-04-24 22:48:04 | Re: Constant WAL replay |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2005-04-25 01:18:13 | Re: Constant WAL replay |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2005-04-24 22:48:04 | Re: Constant WAL replay |