From: | David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Offline Tablespaces and Partial Restore |
Date: | 2016-01-12 13:28:48 |
Message-ID: | 5694FF90.7090706@pgmasters.net |
Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On 1/12/16 6:02 AM, Pedro França wrote:
> Yea, we are considering doing all the function calls and access to
> tables with dblink and see how bad this would hurt performance. It will
> be tough to explain this to the SQL Server guys.
You should consider using the Postgres FDW
(http://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/postgres-fdw.html) It's
a far more elegant solution to the problem of distributed data.
> Maybe there is another approach to deal with this kind of environment?
> Does Postgres only relies on replication for high availability? Maybe an
> extension that I don't know about?
There are a number of logical replication tools (Slony, Bucardo, BDR,
etc.) but I don't see how they would help in this case (because of your
restore requirements).
--
-David
david(at)pgmasters(dot)net
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Regina Obe | 2016-01-12 13:42:16 | Re: Code of Conduct: Is it time? |
Previous Message | Dev Kumkar | 2016-01-12 13:28:35 | Re: PostgreSQL upgrade 9.3.4 -> 9.3.10 |