From: | Venkata Balaji N <nag1010(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Nick Babadzhanian <nb(at)cobra(dot)ru> |
Cc: | pgsql-general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Replication with non-read-only standby. |
Date: | 2016-07-01 03:21:31 |
Message-ID: | CAEyp7J_pXRSjuWcYH9wA+LYYjwniC52VgO-S-ROjW=V+7q73Yg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 11:15 PM, Nick Babadzhanian <nb(at)cobra(dot)ru> wrote:
> Setup:
> 2 PostgreSQL servers are geographically spread. The first one is used for
> an application that gathers data. It is connected to the second database
> that is used to process the said data. Connection is not very stable nor is
> it fast, so using Bidirectional replication is not an option. It is OK if
> data is shipped in batches rather than streamed.
>
> Question:
> Is there a way to make the standby server non-read-only, so that it can
> keep getting updates (mostly inserts) from the 'master', but users are able
> to edit the data stored on 'slave'? Is there some alternative solution to
> this?
>
You can consider Ruby replication for such a requirement. I think, there is
no much development happening around Ruby Replication since long time i
believe. This can be used for production environment.
Regards,
Venkata B N
Fujitsu Australia
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Sridhar N Bamandlapally | 2016-07-01 06:40:44 | Re: table name size |
Previous Message | David G. Johnston | 2016-06-30 19:49:56 | Re: Question about "grant create on database" and pg_dump/pg_dumpall |