From: | MichaelDBA <MichaelDBA(at)sqlexec(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Simon Riggs <simon(dot)riggs(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Cc: | Holger Jakobs <holger(at)jakobs(dot)com>, pgsql-admin(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, Firthouse banu <penguinsfairy(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-admin <pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Re: Re: |
Date: | 2021-11-24 18:18:40 |
Message-ID: | 77723597-904d-bdae-730a-752a6e4af7e0@sqlexec.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-admin |
Thanks, Simon, for your continued feedback.
Simon Riggs wrote on 11/24/2021 12:49 PM:
> On Wed, 24 Nov 2021 at 17:38, MichaelDBA <MichaelDBA(at)sqlexec(dot)com> wrote:
>> 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?
> Many types of distributed system offer consistency. Very few use a
> global lock manager, so this is not a requirement.
Let me try to state it another way... Without a central place where you
can see all the SQL coming against all of the read-write PG nodes at the
same time, you cannot avoid conflicts. PG is active/passive so it
cannot resolve conflicts across multiple primary PG clusters. Hence,
BDR offers an "underneath the covers" approach to deal with conflicts
when they do arise, but innevitably a conflict causes a previous commit
to be rolled back or "suspended" for some kind of manual intervention
later. That is why BDR nowhere states that BDR is ACID-compliant. If it
were ACID-compliant, there would be no external need to address SQL
conflicts.
>> Please explain the magic.
> Anyone interested to know more can start here:
> https://www.enterprisedb.com/products/bidirectional-replication-bdr-postgresql-database
>
I spent about 15 minutes starting at the URL stated above to drill down
into some areas where this subject might be addressed and I couldn't
find it. Perhaps you could be more specific.
I did find this in separate BDR documentation: "BDRis a loosely coupled
shared-nothing multi-master design." I guess you can say "loosely
coupled" is a nice way to say not ACID-compliant.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Mladen Gogala | 2021-11-24 21:51:46 | Re: |
Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2021-11-24 17:49:59 | Re: Re: |