| From: | MichaelDBA <MichaelDBA(at)sqlexec(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Holger Jakobs <holger(at)jakobs(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-admin(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, Simon Riggs <simon(dot)riggs(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Firthouse banu <penguinsfairy(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-admin <pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Re: |
| Date: | 2021-11-24 17:38:00 |
| Message-ID: | 7713c1fd-c674-eb79-02ea-0daf749ac098@sqlexec.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin |
Oh really? BDR is acid-compliant? How can it be without a global lock manager to control access to resources and a consistent view of data and enforce isolation levels?
Please explain the magic.
On Wed, 24 Nov 2021 at 14:03, MichaelDBA<MichaelDBA(at)sqlexec(dot)com> wrote:
> You do understand that multi-master replication is not acid-compliant
> and the implications of that, right? It only works well for "read
> globally, write locally" scenarios.
This isn't true.
Async multi-master has performance advantages, but some drawbacks. But
systems such as BDR3 allow multiple modes of operation that overcome
these perceived issues.
Holger Jakobs wrote on 11/24/2021 12:08 PM:
> On Wed, 24 Nov 2021 at 14:03, MichaelDBA<MichaelDBA(at)sqlexec(dot)com> wrote:
>> You do understand that multi-master replication is not acid-compliant
>> and the implications of that, right? It only works well for "read
>> globally, write locally" scenarios.
> This isn't true.
>
> Async multi-master has performance advantages, but some drawbacks. But
> systems such as BDR3 allow multiple modes of operation that overcome
> these perceived issues.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2021-11-24 17:49:59 | Re: Re: |
| Previous Message | MichaelDBA | 2021-11-24 17:33:08 | Re: Re: |