| From: | alfranio correia junior <alfranio(at)lsd(dot)di(dot)uminho(dot)pt> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jnasby(at)pervasive(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Markus Schiltknecht <markus(at)bluegap(dot)ch>, Christopher Browne <cbbrowne(at)acm(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: standard interfaces for replication providers |
| Date: | 2006-08-10 17:29:59 |
| Message-ID: | 44DB6D17.4040902@lsd.di.uminho.pt |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
>
> Why reinvent the wheel for everything if there was an interface that
> offered some of the needed functionality? Maybe PostgreSQL-R is simply
> too deep in the database for any of this to be useful, but I'm 99%
> certain that Slony could make use of some of this stuff, such as a hook
> on tuples being written out. Likewise, if there were hooks for WAL
> records and a way to inject WAL info into a backend it probably wouldn't
> be too hard to build WAL-based replication on top of that. Heck, PITR
> could probably be refactored to use such hooks.
>
Yeah !!!
:-)
The idea is to provide means to inject things at different levels
(statement,
parsed statements, plans, tuples, logs -wal).
So the GAPI provides a generic and standard interface
that enables any application to retrieve information at different
levels and inject information at different levels.
> One of the great things about Oracle is that they expose a hell of a lot
> of the technology they use to build features like replication; ie: take
> a look at DBMS_*.
>
If I am not wrong such procedures are only for administrative purpose.
For instance,
we cannot insert things in a queue to be replicated.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2006-08-10 17:56:06 | Re: 8.2 features status |
| Previous Message | David Fetter | 2006-08-10 17:28:14 | Re: libpq Describe Extension [WAS: Bytea and perl] |