| From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Daniel Farina <daniel(at)heroku(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH 10/16] Introduce the concept that wal has a 'origin' node |
| Date: | 2012-06-19 22:02:06 |
| Message-ID: | CA+U5nMK1Vu3No2sOY=tc0Y8BO4rSWR00_m0WAkKiQYGujZGvTw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 20 June 2012 04:31, Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> wrote:
> I've done a lot of MM replication,
> and so far have not had to use a topology which allowed loops.
The proposal is to use WAL to generate the logical change stream. That
has been shown in testing to be around x4 faster than having a
separate change stream, which must also be WAL logged (as Jan noted).
If we use WAL in this way, multi-master implies that the data will
*always* be in a loop. So in any configuration we must be able to tell
difference between changes made by one node and another.
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Leon Smith | 2012-06-19 22:06:55 | Re: Transactions over pathological TCP connections |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2012-06-19 22:01:55 | Re: use of int4/int32 in C code |